Military Review

Little Germany's Great War

229

Complicated exposition of the great war



It is quite funny in our country to talk about the very Second World War in Europe. I mean exactly the fighting. It's just that it's just a matter of constantly changing the "shooting point of events." First from Warsaw, then from Paris, then from London, then from Moscow - and we run in circles around the Nazi Reich. Why such difficulties? All operations in Europe were somehow planned from Berlin (even Rome is secondary here). Germany is the main skirmisher and "fiery engine" of war in Europe. Therefore, for the sake of simplicity, let's try to look at the events from Berlin.

Other points of view are possible, I agree. But rushing from London to Moscow and back is a little annoying, you get tired of such "flickering". In general, any subject or topic is perceived much easier when they are presented from a unified position, and not by the "zigzag" method. That is, to talk about the "war in Europe" separately, on the Mediterranean - separately, in the Atlantic - separately and in Russia - separately ... Well, this, of course, increases the number of published books, but also cloudes the brain.

Both at La Plata and in the North Caucasus, the same Germans fought, representing the same state. Yes, Hitlerite Germany is criticized for the inconsistency of the activities of the Kriegsmarine, Luftwaffe and Wehrmacht, as well as the Wehrmacht and SS units. But this is completely different история... And talking about "several separate wars" is a bit strange. No, from our point of view, it is possible that everything is divided into what is "before" and "after" on June 22, but not with German.

Since September 1939, Germany has been at war continuously. Yes, at first the losses are not impressive, but the trouble is the beginning! The British began bombing German cities back in 1940, if anything.

“By the end of 1940, the total damage from the British raids cost Berlin about 200 killed and up to 1800 buildings destroyed. The relatively small number of victims can be explained simply - the main targets were not residential areas - the largest factories were located in the city (AEG, BMW, Dornier, Heinkel, Focke-Wulf), and the main junction of road and railways Germany, and, of course, the headquarters of the Reich "

That is, everyone knows about the "battle for Britain", but not so many history buffs are aware of the "otvetka". Already in 1940, Britain bombed Hitler. This is while we "lived a peaceful life." Meanwhile, the British Royal Air Force already bombed Germany. And at this time there was already a naval war in the Atlantic. And already in the 41st the Germans will be forced (before Barbarossa!) To form the Afrika Korps ... Already in the 41st Hitler was forced to seize Greece and arrange a landing on Crete.

And this is not so much aggression as a war with Britain. Yes, the land forces of the Britons are rather weak ... But there is a fleet! But there is aviation! It must be understood that Hitler's war with the British Empire, which began (really) in the 40s, never stopped until the surrender of Germany. The war was fought in the Atlantic, the Mediterranean and North Africa. Yes, by the number of soldiers, tanks and artillery and they did not get close to the Eastern Front. And there were no such epic land battles as on the Eastern Front. But the war went on continuously. Both on land and at sea and in the air.

Most importantly, Britain blocked German maritime trade. Without this blockade, the Germans would have been many times stronger. That is war alreadywalked. And the Germans no longer lived a "peaceful life". From our point of view, the beginning of "Barbarossa" is a kind of big dividing line between peace and war. From the point of view of the Germans - another operation. They are already are at war. In a big war.

Moreover, for some reason, even Germany's operations in Yugoslavia, Greece and North Africa are considered separately. No, they are part of a "grand strategy" directed against the British. We do not like (for obvious reasons) to talk about the war of the Allies with Hitler. But ideology is better to be swept aside. Let's look at the situation from a military-strategic point of view, located in Berlin. And immediately everything falls into place.

On June 22, Adolf Hitler "closed the encirclement" around the Third Reich. I understand he was planning something different, but that's exactly what happened. Britannia already blocked it from the ocean and the Mediterranean, but until June 22, it could trade with the USSR and through the USSR. After the start of "Barbarossa" the ring was closed. Enemies on all sides. It's just that Britain then was not a small island in the ocean, but a powerful world empire (few people know about this today, and the war is depicted on the map by Germany vs modern Britain). So, Britain (empire!) then stronger and richer than Germany. Oddly enough.

Further more. Good Anglo-Saxons


And the wheels of history keep turning. From our point of view, the 41st summer campaign is just Armageddon. How to say. Nothing super-catastrophic happened. Well, yes, the Wehrmacht attacked, which has very limited supplies of fuel and shells. Spare engines for tanks are also scarce. And in general, the Germans do not have a large number of reserve units. If in the summer of 41 the battles took on a protracted nature, then all these factors would immediately play a role. The Germans had the strength for the first powerful blow. They did not have any opportunities for a serious strengthening of the army.

No "superweapons" or "secret tactics" were observed either. And hundreds of strategic bombers too. And the Japanese did not strike from the east ... That is, if you look at the defeat of the Red Army in the summer of 41, this is one picture. If you look at the ratio of the forces of the Red Army and the Wehrmacht (l / s and equipment) in the summer of 41, the picture is different. And if we consider the situation in Europe as a whole, then A. Hitler had no reason to rejoice. And the Soviet commanders had no reason to despair either. Help is already underway, and the enemy's resources are melting like snow in the sun.

Once again: the British Empire itself is a worthy opponent for Mr. Hitler, but the matter was not limited to Britain. On December 7, the Imperial Japanese Navy launched their bombs and torpedoes on Pearl Harbor. And on December 11, Adolf Hitler declared war on the United States. Everything. After that, the general strategic situation for the Germans became absolutely hopeless.

The gears of the great machine of American expansion were turning slowly. But absolutely non-stop. The entry of the United States into the conflict (in the 41st year!) Meant that no Germany has no chance of winning. Provided that the Soviet front does not fall apart. But this was just the problem. Big problems.

I understand that we categorically do not like to assess the general situation on the planet during the Great Patriotic War. Say, where is your Second Front? But December 41 was not only a counteroffensive near Moscow, but also Hitler's declaration of war on the United States. And that meant carpet bombing for Germany. And thousands of aircraft and tanks for the USSR. And hundreds of thousands of trucks. And stew, and shells, and aluminum.

Not immediately, but gradually. The main supplies and bombing - after Stalingrad. But Hitler "from the outside" did not have to wait for anything good. Already in the fall of the 42nd, the United States landed in North Africa. It's November 8th. And on November 19 - a counteroffensive by Soviet troops at Stalingrad. Yes, there were no German troops either in Morocco or in Algeria. But this operation meant that the United States was deploying large forces near Europe. The countdown has begun ... In the meantime, no, not the Manhattan Project is in full swing, while the Uranium Committee is still working. That is, in the fall of 42, the general strategic situation for the USSR, oddly enough, is much better than for Germany.

Starting in the summer of 1943, the situation for Germany became peak: the battle on the Kursk Bulge was lost, which destroyed the hopes of stopping the Red Army and exhausting it, the allies landed in Sicily. And it was in 43 that Germany "really" began to be bombed.

So, try to imagine the situation: the German armies are forced to retreat on all fronts, famine begins in the country, German cities are regularly and tastefully bombed, and even German U-bots turn from predators into hunted victims, they are poisoned and destroyed. That is, in the summer of 1943 for Germany, everything is not just "bad", but absolutely bad. We in the USSR, fortunately, at least do not know what "carpet bombing" is. In this we were more fortunate than the Germans or the Japanese.

And here, first of all, it is necessary to point out moral the impact of such strikes: if the war thunders somewhere "out there" - this is one thing. But when most large cities, first at night, and then in broad daylight, are subjected to air strikes, it is much more difficult to survive. It is even more difficult in such a situation to maintain faith in victory. When the enemy turns your cities into rubble month after month.

Once again: the difference with the USSR was that a relatively small Germany, which did not have special resources, was surrounded on all sides. Already in the summer of 43, one could speak of an absolutely hopeless and hopeless situation. July month: Americans in Sicily, Italy withdraws from the war, the Battle of Kursk is lost. This is the final. In fact, Italy is a fairly large and developed country and Hitler's only truly valuable ally in Europe. Kursk is the last chance to drag out the war in the east. After that, the Wehrmacht there will never be able to carry out major offensives. Only defend and retreat, sometimes snapping back.

With the landing of the United States and Britain in Sicily and the withdrawal of the Italian kingdom from World War II, the situation became simply tragic. If anything, the "south" of Italy then - these are the colonies in Africa, where the war was going on. It is very far from Germany. And the "north" of Italy borders on Austria. Austria is a small country, and there is already Bavaria. The Alps, I understand, but they are not a hindrance for the Liberators. And for Fortresses.

They don't like to talk about it somehow. That the intervention of the allies had results. And that, having suffered small losses, they were able to radically change the situation in the Mediterranean. After the fall of the Mussolini regime, Mr. Hitler's European allies and satellites had a very good reason to think about their future fate. You see, Kursk is somewhere out there, far away (from the point of view of a European), but the Anglo-Saxons are very close.

We somehow do not like to remember that Germany is located in Europe, which has a long coastline (even for imperial France this was a big problem). So, in the conditions of complete domination of the Anglo-Americans on the water and in the air, the entire Atlantic and Mediterranean coast of Europe was "under attack"! From northern Norway to Greece! At the same time, the Anglo-Saxons have an order of magnitude more material resources (fuel, shells, trucks, aerial bombs, soldiers) than the Germans in this region ...

No, Bremen will not be able to attack with a landing force from the sea. But most of the coast is quite vulnerable to itself. And even Franco is not exactly Hitler's ally. But with the Anglo-Saxons, he lived in perfect harmony ... The giant coast, and there is nothing to defend it ... In the sense - nothing at all: no fleet, no aviation. "Fortress Europe" is such a "fortress" ... But it actually held out for exactly two years, if we count, starting from the moment the German-Italian troops were defeated in North Africa.

Hitler encircled


In our military-post-war propaganda, this was a commonplace: Hitler had no chance of victory. To some extent, this is true. But if he had not attacked the USSR or if he had taken Moscow in 41st ... Or Stalingrad in 42nd. The weakness of the leadership of the Red Army gave him a certain chance. Having got rid of the Eastern Front, Germany could "rise". But ... it didn't work out.

Once again: from the moment Barbarossa began, Hitler was already in a strategic environment. That is, it is stupidly cut off from the rest of the planet by the British Empire and the Soviet Union. This is serious. This is very serious. There are no large natural resources in Europe. Hitler simply could not attack for a long time and successfully, being surrounded. And the German generals should not be considered idiots - they understood this perfectly.

The USSR did not have to smash the Wehrmacht right away, it was enough just to "hold the front", and the Reich itself would suffocate. But this was exactly the problem. And, oddly enough, the strategic situation for the USSR in the summer of 41 was not hopeless (in the sense: the general strategic situation). There was no way to fight at the front - that was the problem. But the general strategic situation at the time of the Kharkov defeat for the USSR was quite favorable. The coalition, which includes the United States, cannot lose the war. That is, everything is bad at the front, but on the planet in general and in Europe in particular, the situation is in our favor!

Thus, we can "play for time." Hitler cannot afford this. For some reason, our historians like to ignore this moment. It makes no sense to consider the Eastern Front in isolation from the whole of Europe. Because for Germany it was only one of the fronts. Let it be the most important and the most expensive one. But there were other fronts as well. And they also "ate resources". Our historians love to view the summer campaign of 42 and the general situation of the USSR and Germany as if there was no one else on the planet.

But this is already wrong. Theoretically, the USSR could go on the defensive. Active, but defensive. Don't try to break through to the west. Save resources. Germany in the summer of 42 was doomed to launch a decisive offensive in the east. The reason is the threat from overseas and the depletion of resources. That is, her general strategic position was much weaker. Theoretically, after the 41st, the Red Army and the Wehrmacht had some kind of equality of forces. But in practice, the position of the Wehrmacht is peak ...

That is, just the Red Army for the summer campaign of 42 could have very different options, the Germans could not have them - only a decisive offensive! Otherwise, death. Therefore, in 41st, 42nd, and 43rd only acceptable option for the Wehrmacht in Russia - decisive offensive at any price in order to defeat the Red Army (the strategic position of the Wehrmacht was desperate from the very beginning of the campaign in Russia). On this they could be "caught". Unfortunately, they did not catch it. And even the actions on the Kursk Bulge in the summer of 43 are far from ideal.

And do not start the "countdown" of the participation of the allies from June 44th. Yes, their land "successes" after June 6 were not very impressive. But there was a "battle for the Atlantic" that required a lot of German resources. And there was a constant war in the air over Germany, which devoured a significant part of the forces of the Luftwaffe and the products of the German military-industrial complex. That is, in order to get an adequate picture of the hostilities in Europe, one must look at the picture as a whole. And, oddly enough, it is more logical to do it from Berlin. It turns out easier.

For those who will persist: the British Empire in 39th had more money, as well as industrial and scientific resources than the USSR or the Third Reich, which tried to fight everyone around it.

Which of the three was “the strongest and most beautiful” is, of course, a debatable question.
Author:
Photos used:
https://albumwar2.com
Articles from this series:
How the Germans almost won the war
Hitler: Total War
229 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. prior
    prior April 26 2021 18: 32
    +31
    Strange position of the author, to say the least.
    Each nation has its own war and its own pain.
    Another attempt to revise the results of the war.
    Is not it so?
    1. Doctor
      Doctor April 26 2021 18: 42
      +12
      Strange position of the author, to say the least.
      Each nation has its own war and its own pain.
      Another attempt to revise the results of the war.
      Is not it so?

      Looks like they got to the later books of Suvorov-Rezun.

      Suvorov wrote a book about Germany's unpreparedness for war in 2000.
      It's called Suicide.
      1. Mitroha
        Mitroha April 27 2021 05: 53
        +12
        The main thing is not this
        But December 41 was not only a counteroffensive near Moscow, but also Hitler's declaration of war on the United States. And that meant carpet bombing for Germany. And thousands of aircraft and tanks for the USSR. And hundreds of thousands of trucks. And stew, and shells, and aluminum.

        And this:
        Major supplies and bombing - after Stalingrad

        And this. But the spoon is good for dinner. And not when it became clear that the victory, albeit at a high price, would be for the USSR.
        The author is trying to tell us that Britain and the United States won the war?
        1. Tavrik
          Tavrik April 27 2021 10: 38
          +2
          The author simply recalled a number of operations carried out by Britain and the United States that took place. We regularly note that Italy was Hitler's ally and their divisions operated on the eastern front. And why in 43 this very Italy suddenly ceased to be an ally - we try not to remember ...
          Also, by the way, there was the Allied landing in the south of France ...
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 April 27 2021 15: 13
            +5
            The author simply recalled a number of operations carried out by Britain and the United States that took place.

            No, the author simply confused the history of the Second World War and the history of the Great Patriotic War.
            Maybe he is a victim of the exam? wassat
            Otherwise, why the indignation that for the USSR the war began in 41, and for Germany a couple of years earlier.
          2. EvilLion
            EvilLion April 28 2021 09: 05
            +2
            Because all adequate German units from Europe went to Kursk. This made the attack on Sicily and further on the mainland possible.
    2. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave April 26 2021 18: 50
      +9
      Strange position of the author,
      I think the author's position should be viewed as the antithesis of the president's recent remark regarding history textbooks.
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins April 26 2021 18: 57
        +15
        Here, probably, from such articles and repelled in 1941 ... Like Germany is limited in resources, fuel, ammunition ...
        And then there were the disasters of 1941-1942.
        1. Artyom Karagodin
          Artyom Karagodin April 26 2021 19: 15
          +22
          Yeah, why then order number 227 was issued in the summer of 42, if on the whole everything was going well? Evil StalinThe executioner, as usual, wanted to kill more people, because he fiercely hated Russia? How does the author explain this?

          Or maybe the situation was extremely dangerous after all? It never occurred to the author?

          And even he contradicts himself. On the one hand, in 41 and 42, our strategic position was better than the German one, but if Hitler had taken Moscow or Stalingrad, everything could have turned out differently. How does one combine with the other in the "author"?

          Naturally, take Hitler Moscow, everything could have turned out differently, so our great-grandfathers fought to death near Moscow and in Stalingrad. And if the Nazis had won then, they could have pumped so much oil and other resources that it could have been enough to conquer England.
          1. astepanov
            astepanov April 26 2021 21: 51
            +21
            The author talks about Germany, but it should be about a united Europe under the leadership of Germany. The USSR waged war not only against Germany, but also against France with its very good industry (how the French suddenly found themselves among the winners - another question), and against Romania with its oil, and against Czechoslovakia with powerful military-industrial production, and against Poland and Hungary (also not the weakest countries in Europe). And due to the satellites, the supply of Germany was not at all weak: oil, coal, metallurgy, and mechanical engineering, and in terms of the chemical industry, only the United States could compete with the Germans. So let's watch it all the same from our bell tower.
            And one more thing: maybe Stalin and the marshals were wrong about something, and it was necessary to wait for the Nazis to surrender themselves. I don’t presume to judge, I am not a military man. But, driving the bastards to Berlin, the Red Army created a buffer zone from the borders of the USSR to the middle of Germany - and this zone ensured the relative security of the country for many decades, and albeit inferior, but allies - until Gorbachev and Yeltsin did not let everything go into a spray, destroying that, which was given at the cost of a huge number of lives. I think that for this reason, talking about "mistakes" is the cynicism of the most disgusting spill.
            1. Artyom Karagodin
              Artyom Karagodin April 26 2021 21: 56
              +3
              In-in! Who is the best in football? The one who is watching the match from the fence!
            2. IL-18
              IL-18 April 26 2021 23: 23
              +7
              Kolya and Urengoy took the pseudonym Oleg Egorov?
        2. URAL72
          URAL72 April 26 2021 19: 28
          +19
          I didn't understand anything myself. Germany seized the territory of the USSR, where 80% of the industry and population was located before the war. Almost all agricultural land. This we had nowhere to eat, and not for them. What did we have in the winter of 1942? Evacuation. Then, thanks to her, through the hellish labor of children, old people and women, we launched a new economy. But until 1943, the worst was for us, and not for the Germans. Let him tell about carpet bombing to those who, at the age of 10-15, put out "lighters" on the roofs of houses. The air defense of Moscow consisted of more guns than the air defense of the whole of island Britain.
          1. Artyom Karagodin
            Artyom Karagodin April 26 2021 19: 46
            +9
            In general, the idea that "at the front, of course, everything was bad, but in general, the strategic situation in our favor" touches with its consistency and logic. Something sane authors are not so many on the site. Or the administration specifically attracts them for the "acuteness of the discussion." That Samsonov with his manilovism, now Oleg Egorov.
        3. Doctor
          Doctor April 27 2021 07: 04
          +2
          Here, probably, from such articles and repelled in 1941 ... Like Germany is limited in resources, fuel, ammunition ...
          And then there were the disasters of 1941-1942.

          Конечно.
          In VO now, too, no one has any doubts about Russia's victory over NATO.
      2. IL-18
        IL-18 April 26 2021 23: 02
        +3
        Quote: 3x3zsave
        I think the author's position should be viewed as the antithesis of the president's recent remark regarding history textbooks.

        In my opinion, the author managed to write a summary of the opuses of all rezuns, corned beefs, boarders, etc. What for? And figs knows! I wanted to write something purely, probably, they will suddenly notice THERE.
        1. IL-18
          IL-18 April 26 2021 23: 05
          +4
          The inability to put a minus for the article is an opportunity for the enemies of our great ancestors to receive only a positive reaction to their abomination.
        2. Revolver
          Revolver April 27 2021 00: 10
          -1
          Quote: IL-18
          suddenly notice THERE

          Well, I noticed THERE. The point of view expressed by the author has a right to exist, but it is very limited.
          ...
          Once three blind men were brought to an elephant and allowed to feel it. Then the blind almost fought. One insisted that the elephant was a fire hose. The other is that a leather sheet. The third is that of a telegraph pole. Each of them is right in his own way, but none of them understood the essence of the elephant.
          1. IL-18
            IL-18 April 28 2021 08: 53
            -1
            Quote: Nagan
            Once upon a time three blind

            Ahh! That's it! If tz. the author causes in someone a feeling of disgust, then this is simply not seeing ALL the completeness of the garbage that is set out in the article. And what would a united Europe look like on June 22, 1941 without the Treaty of 23.08.1939/XNUMX/XNUMX?
            Would there not be among them to a heap, and England in one form or another of participation in the attack on us, France, Japan, and to whom, if the winner is unequivocally determined (moreover, it could have been the USSR in that situation) the United States?
            1. Revolver
              Revolver April 28 2021 09: 02
              0
              No, this is a stupid vision of the picture by the afftor exclusively from Germany. Of course, some details are visible only from the other side, but this in no way gives a complete picture.
    3. evgen1221
      evgen1221 April 27 2021 07: 39
      0
      And what is actually strange? Strategically, the attack on Britain, the states and us and the victory over all at once looks like a complete utopia, which the author described quite intelligibly for those who did not understand this from the school history course.
      1. ABC-schütze
        ABC-schütze April 27 2021 22: 30
        +3
        You see ... The seizure of literally ALL of Europe by the Third Reich, "from the Atlantic coast to the Balkans and, further, North Africa (one might say," at the same time ") does not look like the" complete utopia "you mentioned at all. It is quite for" that Europe "It is natural ... Moreover, the Third Reich did not seem to" attack "the States. The Nazis and Italy declared war on the States only in December 1941. When World War II had been going on in Europe for almost two years. that the States, declaring their "neutrality", did not adhere to its principles at all. And openly provided military and military-technical assistance to the military opponents of the Nazis. Playing at the same time, exclusively "their game", as in the First World War. And "a complete utopia. "and Hitler's bet on the so-called" blitzkrieg "looks (and is) a gamble, as a means of winning a victory over the USSR ...
      2. IL-18
        IL-18 April 28 2021 09: 00
        -1
        Hitler was not going to strategically attack either England or France. Why is it that the liberals go to feces like that when they talk about the Soviet-German Treaty of Negligence? This treaty turned the direction of aggression to the West, which brought Britain to the camp of the USSR's allies, and not enemies, as they had planned.
    4. ABC-schütze
      ABC-schütze April 27 2021 12: 36
      +2
      You are right ... The position of the author is not even "strange", it is unambiguously superficial, but EXACTLY at the CONCEPTUAL level. And this can be seen already in the very first, introductory paragraph. Where Germany is declared the "main gunman" of World War II in Europe. Although these are just i.e. states that, long before September 1939, removed from the Weimar Republic, imposed by THEIR SAMIMI so-called. "Versailles restrictions", EXACTLY AFTER Hitler and the Nazis came to power. "Democracies" Hitler's hands were untied for "territorial gains" in the "east." And it was THIS POLICY of the "European democracies" - the "winners" in the First World War that opened the way for the Third Reich for the subsequent aggressive, military-power policy. Incl. and in relation to their European counterparts. Both on land and at sea. And the potential "object of manipulation" Hitler, "suddenly" himself, very successfully transformed into a manipulating subject. NOT for a moment abandoning their intentions, expressed in "Mein Kampf". Only then the Reichswehr was a banal military-police, 100-strong structure, without aviation, naval forces, artillery and armored vehicles. Those. With ZERO aggressive potential even AFTER the Nazis came to power in Germany. But it was the "European democracies" that helped create this potential. And quite deliberately ... Duc, who is the real "skirmisher" in this case? ..
      1. Sergey M. Karasev
        Sergey M. Karasev April 27 2021 17: 21
        0
        Werner Holt, do you want to completely remove the blame for the outbreak of World War II from Hitler? To begin with, NOBODY FORCED HIM to take advantage of the indulgences of the Versailles Treaty. Was there nowhere else in Germany to spend the state budget, except for the armed forces?
        1. ABC-schütze
          ABC-schütze April 27 2021 22: 11
          +4
          Sergei Mikhailovich, if you managed to subtract my "desire" from my commentary, this is your right. I think my comment is very clear. And it does not need any additional "translation into Russian". And we will "start" with you completely from another. Namely, from my reminder to you that Adolf Hitler made the world happy with his insights outlined in Mein Kampf, LONG before the so-called. "European democracies" introduced "relaxation" on the terms of the Versailles Treaty. Those. goals and intentions of Hitler were known to them IN ADVANCE. And nobody forced the "European democracies" to resort to indulgences under the Versailles Treaty, EXACTLY for the NAZIS, after THEIR coming to power (which I stress EXACTLY for you), "European democracies". And please, be more correct in the definitions. For NAZI Germany (yes, Sergei Mikhailovich, not just the "Germany" you mentioned, but EXACTLY NAZI), after Hitler and the Nazis came to power, really budget money, except for the development of military (offensive) potential, had nowhere to spend. Which, to put it bluntly, was not a secret for the "European democracies", because the Nazis did not intend to hide their intentions to implement their program directives. Is this a revelation for you? .. So what "forced the" Versailles "winners" to introduce the "indulgences" you mentioned EXACTLY for the Nazis?
    5. zenion
      zenion April 27 2021 17: 01
      +2
      The author forgot to add how the Americans urgently exported from occupied Germany, everyone who was associated with banks, military industry enterprises. They were not looking for missilemen, but those who had connections with the United States and England. Maybe no one would have known this, but in 2000 they had to open the papers and how the war began, who participated in it on the part of the Anglo-Saxons and how much they earned on it. Suddenly, the US announced that the opening of the documentation would be postponed for another 50 years. Due to the fact that those who fought in World War II are still alive and this will deal a blow to their psyche. In addition, these participants, told their children, and then their grandchildren, what the hell they fought against their own, that is, the Germans, and not against communism, many will not understand. The author would not hurt to read the book "Confession" which was written by one of those Nazis, who was not the bottom line in Hitler's Reich.
    6. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 39
      0
      Strange position of the author, to say the least.
      Each nation has its own war and its own pain.


      The author wrote not about pain, but about a strategy
      A bit different things, right?
      Present at a lecture at the Academy of the General Staff:

      It hurts me it hurts
      Do not calm this evil pain ...
      It hurts me it hurts ...
      the western front collapsed
  2. Andrey VOV
    Andrey VOV April 26 2021 18: 46
    +11
    Author, what did you want to say with this article ??
    1. Ryaruav
      Ryaruav April 26 2021 19: 05
      +9
      I think that the author wanted to say that the patriotic war of the USSR is part of the Second World War and everything in the world is interconnected and that the actions of the allies and the help of the allies should not be underestimated, but on the other hand, in our time, they were too painfully crooked out of business
      1. ABC-schütze
        ABC-schütze April 27 2021 12: 41
        +2
        Then let's say that World War II began not "with an attack on Poland," but in the mid-30s, with military operations in the Far East and Southeast Asia. How, by the way, it was very ACCURATE and TIMELY reflected in the "Short Course" ...
    2. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk April 26 2021 20: 25
      +7
      Quote: Andrey VOV
      Author, what did you want to say with this article ??

      That we just had to defend ourselves, and the Naglo-Saxons with the USA, Canada and Australia themselves would have defeated Hitler, and then we would have been released. Personally, I understand this nonsense, sorry, article.
    3. dauria
      dauria April 26 2021 20: 34
      +11
      Author, what did you want to say with this article ??


      That the drunken squabble of a couple of German divisions and five Italian divisions in El Alamein is equal to Stalingrad. And that 82 percent of those killed on the eastern front is equal to 18 percent on the rest from Norway to Africa.
      Like, the British also fought. Since the 39th year. And there was some kind of "battle". True, without soldiers. Now for Britain, then for the Atlantic.
      In fact, they both scrambled from Dunkirk and sat on their hummock until the summer of 44, when the Russian Vanka broke the back of the Fuhrer. There are a lot of such articles, films and computer toys. "Saving Private Brian" and games like "Castle Wolfenstein".
      1. Kronos
        Kronos April 26 2021 21: 11
        +2
        At sea, the allies of the Germans were pretty beaten
        1. IL-18
          IL-18 April 26 2021 23: 18
          +1
          Yes?
          Quote: Kronos
          At sea, the allies of the Germans were pretty beaten

          Is it like, until May 1945, a great maritime power acted as a serious threat to the fleets of England and the United States? And the "Tirpitz" was so terrible to the entire City Fleet that the whole convoy was left without cover?
          In this case, the Soviet Northern and Baltic fleets are worth the fleets of BOTH allies.
          I agree that 4% of that assistance was really important, because this is not the services of lawyers, makeup artists and stock speculators, but a specific product. But for the rest, alas, their help cannot but raise doubts, including the opening of a second front less than a year before the Victory. This does not apply to ordinary soldiers of these countries, killed or wounded, but the essence remains the same.
          1. Kronos
            Kronos April 26 2021 23: 50
            -2
            The only option for a victory over the British was for the Nazis with the help of a blockade that the Allies thwarted, and the Germans did not have the opportunity to organize a landing on Britain itself. Do not forget that the main forces of the fleet and not a small part of the aviation were used against the allies, which facilitated the situation of the USSR.
      2. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi April 26 2021 21: 29
        -2
        Quote: dauria
        Author, what did you want to say with this article ??


        That the drunken squabble of a couple of German divisions and five Italian divisions in El Alamein is equal to Stalingrad. And that 82 percent of those killed on the eastern front is equal to 18 percent on the rest from Norway to Africa.
        Like, the British also fought. Since the 39th year. And there was some kind of "battle". True, without soldiers. Now for Britain, then for the Atlantic.
        In fact, they both scrambled from Dunkirk and sat on their hummock until the summer of 44, when the Russian Vanka broke the back of the Fuhrer. There are a lot of such articles, films and computer toys. "Saving Private Brian" and games like "Castle Wolfenstein".

        From the moment the US Armed Forces landed in St. Africa, the operation to defeat the Axis forces began, which ended on May 12 with the 43 surrender of the German-Italian troops.

        Allied casualties totaled 76, including losses incurred by the First Army on November 020, 8 and by the Eighth Army on February 1942, 8. British and Commonwealth casualties totaled 9; 1943 people were killed, 38 people were injured and 360 people were missing.
        Free France lost 19 people; 439 killed, 2156 injured and 10276 missing.
        American casualties totaled 18; 221 killed, 2 injured and 715 missing.
        From 22 to 30 November 1942, the British Air Force flew 1710 sorties and lost at least 45 aircraft. The US Air Force flew 180 sorties and lost at least 7 aircraft. From December 1 to December 12, the RAF flew 2225 sorties and lost at least 37 aircraft. The United States Air Force flew 523 sorties and lost 17 more aircraft. From 13 to 26 December, the British Air Force flew 1940 sorties, losing at least 20 aircraft, while the US Air Force flew 720 sorties, losing 16 aircraft. From December 27, 1942 to January 17, 1943, the British Air Force flew 3160 sorties and lost 38 aircraft, while the US Air Force flew about 3200 sorties and lost 36 aircraft. From 18 January to 13 February, the RAF made 5000 sorties, not counting those directed against shipping, resulting in the loss of 34 aircraft, while the United States Air Force flew approximately 6250 sorties, losing 85 aircraft. During the remainder of February to 28 March, 156 Allied aircraft were lost. lost. From March 29 to April 21, 203 Allied aircraft were destroyed. From 22 April until the end of the campaign, 45 bombers and 110 fighters were lost; 12 bombers and 47 fighters RAF, USAAF lost 32 bombers and 63 fighters, and the French lost 1 bomber.
        The allies lost up to 1500 tanks in battles.
        Axis armies lost from 290 to 000 people killed and captured.
        In official British history, Playfair wrote that the Allies took 238 prisoners without injury; 243 101 Germans, 784 89 Italians and 442 47 others. In 017, Rick Atkinson wrote that a quarter of a million prisoners is a reasonable estimate. Playfair wrote that the American official historian H.F. Howe recorded the capture of 2004 Axis soldiers, the 275th Army Group's calculation of 000 prisoners (including 18 Germans), that Rommel estimated 244 Germans captured, and Arnim estimated 500 German and 157 Italian prisoners. war. The Luftwaffe lost 000+ aircraft in the Mediterranean Theater from November 130 - May 000 (100 percent of the Luftwaffe). At least 000 aircraft were destroyed; From 200 to 000 November 2,422, the Luftwaffe made 1942 sorties, losing 1943 aircraft, including 41 destroyed on the ground. Regia Aeronautica recorded the loss of four. From 1045 to 22 December, the Luftwaffe made 30 sorties and lost 1942 aircraft, including nine on the ground, while the Italians recorded the loss of ten more. From 1084 to 63 December, the Luftwaffe made 21 sorties and lost 1 aircraft, while the Italians lost three. From December 12, 1000 to January 37, 13, the Luftwaffe lost 26 aircraft; Regia Aeronautica losses are unknown. From 1030 January to 17 February, the Luftwaffe lost another 27 aircraft, but Italian losses are unknown. From February 1942 to March 17, 1943 German aircraft were lost, and the Regia Aeronautica another 47. From March 18 to April 13, 100 Luftwaffe aircraft were destroyed and 14 "operating aircraft and almost all of their remaining aircraft were lost."
        From April 22 to the end of the Luftwaffe lost 273 aircraft; 42 bombers, 166 fighters, 52 transport aircraft, 13 observation aircraft Storch and the Italians recorded the loss of 17 aircraft; More than 600 aircraft were captured by the Allies.
        Axis countries lost up to 2500 tanks in battles and as trophies.


        1. Krasnoyarsk
          Krasnoyarsk April 26 2021 22: 48
          +6
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          Since the landing of the US Armed Forces in St. Africa

          Oh, how many bukAF, does the number of allied losses depend on this amount? Why data for obscure periods? To make it harder to understand the essence? And how many people and equipment did the Germans lose on the Eastern Front? And, preferably in comparison with the losses in Africa, Sicily and other Ardennes, and not for an incomprehensible period, but in general. And then he piled up "seven miles to heaven and all the peshi"
          1. Aaron Zawi
            Aaron Zawi April 26 2021 23: 20
            0
            Quote: Krasnoyarsk
            Quote: Aron Zaavi
            Since the landing of the US Armed Forces in St. Africa

            Oh, how many bukAF, does the number of allied losses depend on this amount? Why data for obscure periods? To make it harder to understand the essence? And how many people and equipment did the Germans lose on the Eastern Front? And, preferably in comparison with the losses in Africa, Sicily and other Ardennes, and not for an incomprehensible period, but in general. And then he piled up "seven miles to heaven and all the peshi"

            And you still count how much the Germans kept on the Western Front of aviation. How much manpower and resources they spent on the creation of submarines. Now what to do with it?
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk April 27 2021 09: 54
              +4
              Quote: Aron Zaavi

              And you still count how much the Germans kept on the Western Front of aviation. How much effort and money did they spend on the creation of underwater

              Well, count, do not be lazy, how many COMBAT divisions the Germans kept on the eastern front. And compare with the number of SECURITY and TRAINING divisions in the west. From here you can decide which front was the main one for the Germans.
              The Germans fought off the powerful USA and Britain with small forces, and threw their main force against the weak USSR. One Panzer division of the Wehrmacht, in the Ardennes, called into question the existence of the entire group of Allied forces. With all their aviation. Pancake warriors.
              Aaron, you better shut up, don't be disgraced.
              1. Aaron Zawi
                Aaron Zawi April 27 2021 11: 14
                -1
                Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                Quote: Aron Zaavi

                And you still count how much the Germans kept on the Western Front of aviation. How much effort and money did they spend on the creation of underwater

                Well, count, do not be lazy, how many COMBAT divisions the Germans kept on the eastern front. And compare with the number of SECURITY and TRAINING divisions in the west. From here you can decide which front was the main one for the Germans.
                The Germans fought off the powerful USA and Britain with small forces, and threw their main force against the weak USSR. One Panzer division of the Wehrmacht, in the Ardennes, called into question the existence of the entire group of Allied forces. With all their aviation. Pancake warriors.
                Aaron, you better shut up, don't be disgraced.

                What kind of nonsense?
                1. Krasnoyarsk
                  Krasnoyarsk April 27 2021 11: 42
                  +2
                  Quote: Aron Zaavi
                  What kind of nonsense?

                  But in essence, there is nothing to answer. tongue
                  1. Aaron Zawi
                    Aaron Zawi April 27 2021 12: 51
                    +1
                    Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                    Quote: Aron Zaavi
                    What kind of nonsense?

                    But in essence, there is nothing to answer. tongue

                    The war was won not by meat, but by resources that were turned into tanks, artillery and aviation. So, against the Allies, these resources were spent no less than against us.
                    1. Krasnoyarsk
                      Krasnoyarsk April 27 2021 12: 53
                      -1
                      Quote: Aron Zaavi
                      against the Allies these resources were spent no less than against us.

                      Did he do it himself or did Grandpa Fritz help?
                      1. Aaron Zawi
                        Aaron Zawi April 27 2021 13: 10
                        +1
                        Quote: Krasnoyarsk
                        Quote: Aron Zaavi
                        against the Allies these resources were spent no less than against us.

                        Did he do it himself or did Grandpa Fritz help?

                        This is a powerful argument in the discussion. tongue
                      2. Krasnoyarsk
                        Krasnoyarsk April 27 2021 17: 15
                        0
                        Quote: Aron Zaavi

                        This is a powerful argument in discussion.

                        Well, so the teachers are good -
                        Quote: Aron Zaavi

                        What kind of nonsense?
        2. IL-18
          IL-18 April 26 2021 23: 21
          -1
          Correctly written Ali, fellow countryman.
      3. chenia
        chenia April 28 2021 08: 57
        0
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        Since the landing of the US Armed Forces in St. Africa


        And Hitler sent Romel to help floor Division GG. (November 1942)
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        May 12, 43 by the surrender of the German-Italian troops.

        They quickly coped with FOUR AND HALF Wehrmacht divisions (well, there is a separate song about the Italians).
        Feel the importance of this front.
  3. Cananecat
    Cananecat April 27 2021 11: 18
    +1
    Quote: Andrey VOV
    Author, what did you want to say with this article ??

    I didn't want anything ... just epic nonsense.
    Adolf, who is "surrounded", decides to attack again? If everything has been so bad in Germany since 1940, why go into another quarrel, especially after becoming friends with the Pact? Unreal nonsense based on Suvorov's works ...
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 27 2021 12: 34
      +1
      Quote: Canecat
      If everything has been so bad in Germany since 1940, why go into another quarrel, especially after becoming friends with the Pact?

      But because the Germans in 1940 found themselves in a stalemate. Britain refuses to surrender, landing on the Island is impossible (in this the Wehrmacht and the Kriegsmarine are united), a protracted war is contraindicated for the Reich - as practice has shown, in the end the overseas cousins ​​of the islanders break into it.
      And then Adolf is visited by a crazy idea: Britain holds on only because it hopes for its allies - the USSR and the United States. The Reich cannot do anything with the United States, but the United States itself cannot quickly enter the war. This means that if the USSR is quickly defeated, then Britain will lose all hopes on the continent and can go to peace.
      The option "to partially demobilize the army and start building a fleet" did not work for the Reich: the industrial capabilities of Britain and the United States working for it were still greater. In addition, it was impossible to greatly reduce the army due to movements in the East. Plus, the protraction of the war increased the likelihood of Britain's allies joining it.
      1. Kuroneko
        Kuroneko April 27 2021 13: 15
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        And then Adolf is visited by a crazy idea: Britain holds on only because it hopes for its allies - the USSR and the United States. The Reich cannot do anything with the United States, but the United States itself cannot quickly enter the war. This means that if the USSR is quickly defeated, then Britain will lose all hopes on the continent and can go to peace.

        What nonsense? Before the beginning and even AFTER the beginning of the Second World War, we were not allies with Britain for a long time.
        Britain concluded a military alliance with the USSR only a year later. On May 26, 1942, an agreement was signed in London between the USSR and Great Britain on an alliance in the war against Nazi Germany and her accomplices in Europe and on cooperation and mutual assistance after the war.

        What the hell is an ally? Churchill colic hated the USSR. It's just that the cunning plan didn't work out - the diligently fostered German Shepherd first of all grabbed the owners' thighs. So I had to reluctantly go to an alliance.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 27 2021 15: 54
          0
          Quote: Kuroneko
          What nonsense? Before the beginning and even AFTER the beginning of the Second World War, we were not allies with Britain for a long time.

          German ancestral fears - Britain may sign for itself the steam rink of Russia.
          And the Fuhrer believed that Britain did not surrender only because it hoped for Russia.
          Assumption: We will not attack England, but break up the illusions that give England the will to resist. Then we can hope for a change in her position. The war itself is won. France fell away from the "British lion." Italy fetters British troops. Submarine and air war can decide the outcome of the war, but it will last a year or two.
          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 the incredible strengthening of Japan in East Asia.
          Russia is the East Asian sword of England and America against Japan. An unpleasant wind blows here for England. The Japanese, like the Russians, have their own plan, according to which Russia should be eliminated before the end of the war. Russian film about the victorious war! England especially relies on Russia. Something happened in London! The British were completely discouraged, now they suddenly perked up again.
          Overheard conversations. Russia is unhappy with the rapid development of events in Western Europe. It is enough for Russia to tell England that it does not want to see Germany too [strong] for the British to cling to this statement as if drowning in a straw, and began to hope that in six to eight months things will turn out very differently.
          If Russia is defeated, England will lose its last hope. Then Germany will dominate in Europe and the Balkans.
          Conclusion: In accordance with this reasoning, Russia should be eliminated. The deadline is spring 1941.
          The sooner we break up Russia, the better. An operation will only make sense if we crush the entire state with one swift blow. Just capturing some part of the territory is not enough.
          © Halder - Fuehrer's speech at a meeting in the Berghof 31.07.1940/XNUMX/XNUMX
          Quote: Kuroneko
          What the hell is an ally? Churchill colic hated the USSR.

          Winnie, when it was a problem, quickly forgot about emotions and moved on to real-life politician.
          I have only one goal - to destroy Hitler, and this greatly simplifies my life. If Hitler had invaded hell, I would at least speak favorably about Satan in the House of Commons.
          1. Kuroneko
            Kuroneko April 27 2021 16: 10
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Winnie, when it was a problem, quickly forgot about emotions and moved on to real-life politician.

            And just as quickly he gave the back, when it was no longer pinned. Fulton speech. In general, your theory of logic is not devoid, but the same Britain could not have known in advance how the cards would lay, especially in the light of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Well, in general, here, in fact, Hitler's personal attitude towards England was more in evidence. He hoped to the last that he could win her over to his side as a junior partner for the division of the world (and gave a direct message to Dunkirk). I could not calculate Anglo-Saxon pride, especially since at that time England had much more weight than America itself. The situation will change only after the Atlantic Charter - when, in fact, by direct blackmail Roosevelt ensured the further dominance of the United States. England then breathed on incense, there even was not enough non-ferrous metal that everything was cut down right down to the door handles. Someone's emphasis on robbery of colonies came out sideways. = 3
  • Unknown
    Unknown April 26 2021 18: 51
    +6
    Not at all strange, and not a new position. On VO, at least in the comments, they have already tried to push it more than once. So don't be surprised. Rewriting history is in full swing. New data, all sorts of versions, etc. will be presented. Of course, everything is designed for young people. But she, the landmarks in life, has already lost. It's sad.
  • cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe April 26 2021 18: 57
    +9
    Kolya from Urengoy decided to call on the other side to squeeze a tear out of me for the "innocent victims". And why did he not compare the losses in technology, and most importantly the civilian casualties of the eastern direction. Smears from the author by the State Department and the Greens.
  • strannik1985
    strannik1985 April 26 2021 18: 59
    +2
    already in 1940 Britain was bombing

    An interesting disclaimer, in general, England officially entered the war against Germany in 1939, but they bombed "interestingly" - from September 3 to September 27, the British Air Force dropped 18 million leaflets on the Germans.
  • kuzimka
    kuzimka April 26 2021 19: 09
    .
    Normal article, a little overwhelming, but the meaning is correct. The entire history of the war has been fouled by the communist-Bolshevik camarilla of pseudo-historians who composed such a fierce blizzard to please the leaders of the Party and the Soviet Union. And this is not a memory of those who died and who endured the entire burden of the war; this is a shielding and retouching of the worst miscalculations and mistakes of the country's leadership and the armed forces. And the fiction on the Great Patriotic War - like the most important war - is that it is not necessary to explain what the Soviet Union was doing in '39 in Finland, Poland, in the 40th in the Baltic States and Bessarabia. That at this time the best friend of the Soviet Union is Germany under the leadership of Hitler and the Nazis. But at 41 - yes, this is already the main war. And the squeals of pseudo-patriotic commentators about the rewriting of history are the same rotten bullshit. Because for the most part none of them knows the true history of the war. Moreover, they do not know the history of military operations of their small homeland, veterans who lived or still live somewhere nearby, eyewitnesses of that terrible war. This is our story ...
    1. strannik1985
      strannik1985 April 26 2021 19: 21
      +2
      The whole history of the war is fouled

      A respected commentator should watch the course of the Moscow negotiations in the summer of 1939 and the realities of the Strange War from September 1939 to May 1940. wink
    2. Unknown
      Unknown April 26 2021 20: 46
      +4
      Quote: kuzimka
      This is a normal article, a little old-fashioned, but the meaning is correct. The entire history of the war has been fouled by the communist-Bolshevik camarilla of pseudo-historians who composed such a fierce blizzard to please the leaders of the Party and the Soviet Union. And this is not the memory of those who died and who endured the entire burden of the war; this is a shielding and retouching of the worst miscalculations and mistakes of the country's leadership and the armed forces.

      Well. cards in hand. let's start spreading your truth about the war. about which you know nothing. For one thing. tell me 57 year old. how to remember the dead. I didn’t remember that for 40 years.
      Quote: kuzimka
      And the fiction on the Great Patriotic War - like the most important war - is that it is not necessary to explain what the Soviet Union was doing in '39 in Finland, Poland, in the 40th in the Baltic States and Bessarabia. That at this time the best friend of the Soviet Union is Germany under the leadership of Hitler and the Nazis. But at 41 - yes, this is already the main war. And the squeals of pseudo-patriotic commentators about the rewriting of history are the same rotten bullshit. Because for the most part none of them knows the true history of the war. Moreover, they do not know the history of military operations of their small homeland, veterans who lived or still live somewhere nearby, eyewitnesses of that terrible war. This is our story ...

      Of course, there is no Great Patriotic War. and the people fought from under the stick. I've heard this more than once in my life. from undershoots. who received a dozen in the 45th and were released. because. The Soviet government was good. when he began his working life at the age of 17 and later. after the service. They were still alive in the early 80s. and cried into the waistcoat in drunkenness. but careful. if there were veterans nearby. could get in the teeth right away. And I know very well. what the Red Army was doing. and in Finland. The Baltics. Bessarabia. Question. what the Finns were doing in Petrozavodsk. Latvian and Estonian SS. in the Pskov region. Leningrad? Everyone knows what Lithuanians did in Minsk
      Everyone knows the same. how they were friends with Hitler.
      all the democracies of Europe On that vomit. which they wrote. there was no need to answer. but stuck. The history of his area where he lived. and now I live I know. from an early age he was engaged in excavations on the battlefield. with a veteran born in 1925. worked together in the 80s. so a month and a half ago I washed in the bath. his great-grandson brought. wished health, for many more years. But where such clever people come from. with such comments? Find out. what are they.
      1. kuzimka
        kuzimka April 26 2021 22: 17
        -8
        It is a pity that at 57 you remain a scoop and do not want to look a little further than the text of Soviet history textbooks. As for the true history of the war, look at the history of the defense of the Brest Fortress at your leisure, only the model of 39, and then compare it with the history of the sample of 41 years. And just try to imagine yourself first in the place of the Polish soldiers, who organized the defense and then also came out of the encirclement in an organized way, and then imagine the Red Army men who fell into wild chaos and hopelessness, and with what results the defense ended in 41 years. The soldiers died heroically without any sense. They sacrificed their lives because the fathers-commanders of various ranks could not competently manage their units. Well, as usual, no help came ...
        The history of the war is, it seems to me, a mosaic made up of small stories of battles for each village, small town, high-rise, line, crossing. And these small, but very scary and bitter, bloody stories - this is the history of the war. And in these stories there is all - courage and heroism, cowardice and betrayal, all shades of human nature. And agitation in the style of the Motherland -Mother calls, this is from the category of propaganda and a false history of war.
        And to find out where such clever guys come from, you don't need much - just take a little part in the events in the combat zone. All the qualities of a person are revealed very quickly and clearly. Something like this.
        1. Unknown
          Unknown April 27 2021 06: 45
          +5
          Quote: kuzimka
          It is a pity that at 57 you remain a scoop and do not want to look a little further than the text of Soviet history textbooks. Regarding the true history of the war, look at the history of the defense of the Brest Fortress at your leisure, only the sample of 39, and then compare with the history of the sample of 41

          I am proud that I had the honor of being a citizen of the USSR, and taught history according to Soviet textbooks, and not according to the current ones, coupled with the works of anti-advisers and Russophobes, which modern historians like to refer to, repeating endlessly hackneyed nonsense about the Poles in Brest No sooner had the Germans and half of Poland passed, as the entire government, led by the supreme commander of the Polish army Rydz-Smigly, scrambled so that only a pillar of dust, and ended up in Romania. that it has nothing to do with Poland, as a citizen of another country. Here's an unbiased story.
          Quote: kuzimka
          The soldiers died heroically without any sense. They sacrificed their lives because the fathers-commanders of various ranks could not competently manage their units. Well, as usual, no help came ...

          Immediately you can see a person who does not know what army service is. War is a war for that, soldiers have always died and will die on it. But if soldiers are fighting, fighting, while killing, maiming the enemy, then it is no longer pointless, but knocking out alive the strength of the enemy in a given sector of defense.
          Quote: kuzimka
          The history of the war is, it seems to me, a mosaic made up of small stories of battles for each village, small town, high-rise, line, crossing. And these small, but very scary and bitter, bloody stories - this is the history of the war. And in these stories there is all - courage and heroism, cowardice and betrayal, all shades of human nature. And agitation in the style of the Motherland -Mother calls, this is from the category of propaganda and a false history of war

          It is necessary to be baptized when it seems. War is a terrible thing, and especially the Great Patriotic War. Each soldier takes an oath specifically to his country. For some it is Motherland, and for some it is the Council of Deputies, now Rashka, who perceives how the country in which they live.
          Quote: kuzimka
          And to find out where such clever guys come from, you don't need much - just take a little part in the events in the combat zone. All the qualities of a person are revealed very quickly and clearly. Something like this.

          I’ll be interested in what military events you participated in? He served 82-84 years TURKVO, field post 93992 in the city of Jalalabad, then Mehtarlam, Laghman province. I also know what qualities are revealed.
          1. kuzimka
            kuzimka April 27 2021 11: 17
            -2
            It is difficult to discuss with a person who considers their point of view to be categorically the only correct one. At the same time, he argues without going into the meaning of what the opponent has said.
            And then the statements about the SS, punitive forces in the occupied territories and the like? The question of the Red Army in 39 and 40 on the territory of foreign countries was different: the Second World War began, the British and the Germans had already grappled and the war was going on. But the Soviet Union does not take sides, but begins to make "liberation campaigns" to Poland (Western Belarus and Ukraine), Finland, then Romania, the Baltic countries. And the Second World War is underway, the war does not end. Well, when already at 41 Germany broke into the Soviet Union, then the Great Patriotic War began - with a clean slate, and in 39 and 40 - no, this is not the Soviet Union. This is about the foresight of the leadership of the Party and the country of the Soviets and the subsequent writing of the "correct" history of the Second World War and the maximum suppression of the history of the Second World War.

            There is no need to make judgments about the knowledge of other people of the features of army service. It is not polite. Judging by the years of your service, this is an urgent one, and the VUS is maximally zamkomvzvoda, with the rank of senior sergeant. And all your combat experience is made up of the experience of a simple fighter, not a unit commander who must control these very fighters. And take care of these very fighters. And in my comments about the senseless heroic death of ordinary soldiers, we are talking about the fact that the fathers-commanders at various levels themselves created this senselessness, practically not knowing how to control their units, poorly trained in battle tactics, organizing interaction with other types and types of troops. And how many people were killed while they studied on the blood.

            And of course no one encroaches on your pride as a citizen of the Soviet Union. Many locals come from there. Only the world around us is changing, a huge array of information appears about the history of that country - different, both good and bad. And we need to think about it and draw conclusions so as not to step on a rake again ...
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA April 27 2021 12: 42
              +6
              Quote: kuzimka
              The question of the Red Army in 39 and 40 on the territory of foreign countries was different: the Second World War began, the British and the Germans had already grappled and the war was going on. But the Soviet Union does not take sides, but begins to make "liberation campaigns" to Poland (Western Belarus and Ukraine), Finland, then Romania, the Baltic countries. And the Second World War is underway, the war does not end.

              And why on earth should the USSR interfere in the fight between the German fighting hamster and the British with the French? Since the guarantors of Versailles allowed the Reich to violate all the requirements of the treaty, then let them bear responsibility for their actions.
              Nobody thought that the armies of the victorious countries in WWI would merge on the continent in a month - everyone hoped for a repeat of the "great sitting."
              1. kuzimka
                kuzimka April 27 2021 14: 47
                -4
                The states, in general, also officially entered the Second World War in December 41, even later than the Soviet Union, but while others had already got into the fight, they did not squeeze out the territory on the sly from Canada and Mexico, as the Soviet Union did with its western borders and the Baltic states. This is probably why for the States the history of the war is the history of the Second World War, and for the Soviet Union it is the history of the Great Patriotic War.
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA April 27 2021 15: 57
                  +2
                  Quote: kuzimka
                  The states, in general, also officially entered the Second World War in December 41, even later than the Soviet Union, but while others had already got into the fight, they did not squeeze out the territory on the sly from Canada and Mexico, as the Soviet Union did with its western borders and the Baltic states.

                  Well, yes, the neutral USA only occupied Iceland and the Dutch possessions on the American continent.
                  The Yankees are generally simpler - they can always refer to the Monroe Doctrine. smile
                2. chenia
                  chenia April 28 2021 09: 35
                  +1
                  Quote: kuzimka
                  It's a pity that at 57 you remain a scoop

                  It is a pity that in your ... years you remain a hardened liberal.
                  Quote: kuzimka
                  and begins to make "liberation campaigns" to Poland (Western Belarus and Ukraine), Finland, then Romania, the Baltic countries. And the Second World War is underway, the war does not end.


                  Are Western Belarus and Ukraine Polish lands? Or a European hyena grabbed them at a time of turmoil (after all, they can). They took it along the borders that were determined by the world arbiters.
                  Finland (also formed in turmoil, and the lands seemed to be bought by the Republic of Ingushetia from Sweden). - offered three times more, did not agree.
                  Bessarabia -Not when the USSR was not recognized by the Romanians (they also snatched it off in turmoil).
                  The Baltic countries, well, they seem to be on their own through a referendum.

                  Like the classics, Russians always come for their own (and we don't need someone else's).
                  Quote: kuzimka
                  and Mexican territories,

                  This is you about Texas, probably., And how many of the Spaniards squeezed.
                  We chose the wrong example.
            2. Unknown
              Unknown April 27 2021 15: 10
              +2
              Quote: kuzimka
              It is difficult to discuss with a person who considers their point of view to be categorically the only correct one. At the same time, he argues without going into the meaning of what the opponent has said

              Yes, it's difficult, not at the age to change your point of view, to please the current moment. The meaning of what was said is clear and unacceptable to me.
              Quote: kuzimka
              And then the statements about the SS, punitive forces in the occupied territories and the like? The question of the Red Army in 39 and 40 on the territory of foreign countries was different: the Second World War began, the British and the Germans had already grappled and the war was going on. But the Soviet Union does not take sides, but begins to make "liberation campaigns" to Poland (Western Belarus and Ukraine), Finland, then Romania, the Baltic countries. And World War II is coming, the war does not end

              They didn’t hear me or don’t want to hear me? Why was the Red Army in the listed places, I know. I explain. The WWII of the USSR did not unleash, as far as is known, the European states started it. When the Soviet Union 17.10. In 39 years he entered the territory of Western Belarus and the Carpathian region, Poland, as the state ceased to exist, the government was already mentioned, and the armed forces showed complete incapacity to defend the sovereignty of their country. The USSR was not going to leave the fraternal peoples to the mercy of fate. All the more, the inclusion of these peoples in the “sanitation” Poland is a moot point. Poland there, on the subject of joining, did not hold a plebiscite, simply using the right of the strong, at that time. The USSR did not make any trip to the Baltic States, the troops arrived at military bases, on the basis of the Pacts of Mutual Assistance. Their main points are:

              The parties guarantee mutual military, economic and other assistance subject to an invasion on the territory of one of the countries of the "great European power".
              The USSR guaranteed to each country the supply of weapons and equipment on preferential terms.
              Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia allowed the USSR to form military bases on the western borders.
              Countries undertake not to sign diplomatic documents and not to join coalitions against the second country of the agreements. You still need to know the history, and not speak in Cold War clichés. Yes, the USSR demanded to change the composition of the government to ensure friendly relations between the countries, but after that free elections followed, recognized at the international level, and they are much more legitimate than the government. , Pietro Badoglio in Italy in 1943-44, when most of the country was under the allies, or the de Gaulle government, in France, which no one elected, but the Anglo-Americans brought with them. persecution of the Communist Party of these countries, in which the occupation troops were located, held elections in order to prevent the CP from coming to power. Both Churchill and de Gaulle write about this and many other things in their memoirs. And they are worth reading before proving your versions of WWII.
              Quote: kuzimka
              Judging by the years of your service, this is an urgent one, and the VUS is maximally zamkomvzvoda, with the rank of senior sergeant. And all your combat experience is made up of the experience of a simple fighter, not a unit commander who must control these very fighters. And protect these very fighters

              NCOs, the backbone of any army. The sergeant is the commander of the unit entrusted to him, be it a squad or a platoon. He controls and bears responsibility for the fighters. There can be no other way.
              Quote: kuzimka
              that the fathers-commanders at various levels themselves created this senselessness, practically not being able to control their units, poorly trained in battle tactics, organizing interaction with other types and branches of the armed forces. And how many people were killed while they studied on the blood.

              Everyone learned from blood, including the Germans. Paulus was also senselessly sitting in Stalingrad, but being taken prisoner by ours, he refused to give the order to end the resistance, citing that he was in captivity and had no right to order. meaningless, and he didn't think so.
              Quote: kuzimka
              And of course no one encroaches on your pride as a citizen of the Soviet Union. Many locals come from there. Only the world around us is changing, a huge array of information appears about the history of that country - different, both good and bad. And we need to think about it and draw conclusions so as not to step on a rake again ...

              They have already encroached on. For me, that war, the Great Patriotic War, for you is not. And let the world change, and not for the better, just don't touch our history and memory.
    3. gsev
      gsev April 27 2021 00: 14
      +2
      Quote: kuzimka
      This is a normal article, a little old-fashioned, but the meaning is correct. The entire history of the war has been fouled by the communist-Bolshevik camarilla of pseudo-historians who composed such a fierce blizzard to please the leaders of the Party and the Soviet Union.

      Soviet historians did not pay attention to much. For example, at the height of the Battle of Britain, during the loss of Burma, Singapore, Malaya, Hong Kong, the British dropped more bombs on the field commander in Pakistan Fakir-iz-Ypres than the Germans on London, and apparently more than the British until February 1942 on the Germans and Japanese combined. But this does not mean that the Fakir of Ypres was a more dangerous enemy of Great Britain than Hitler and the Mikado. In addition, Hitler until June 1941 quite effectively seized African and European resources. What could have prevented him from seizing Arab and Iranian oil from the spring of 1942 if he had postponed the war with the USSR. And what would the USSR be able to do with aviation gasoline for its aviation two to three times less without American and British supplies. British and American airstrikes until about mid-2, early 1943 consumed more resources than caused damage to the Germans. If Hitler seized the territory of the Caucasus and the Urals in the summer of 1944, he could control the entire eastern front with twenty divisions, and he could switch the power of his industry to the construction of aviation and a fleet, at least underwater, which would make the Anglo-Saxon landing operations very problematic in Africa and Europe and the building up of forces in the UK.
    4. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 27 2021 12: 36
      +4
      Quote: kuzimka
      And the fiction on the Great Patriotic War - like the most important war - is that it is not necessary to explain what the Soviet Union was doing in '39 in Finland, Poland, in the 40th in the Baltic States and Bessarabia.

      Much the same thing that Britain tried to do in 1940 in Norway. And she did in the French possessions in the Middle East and Africa. smile
  • paul3390
    paul3390 April 26 2021 19: 12
    -8
    If we take into consideration the conspiracy theory about betrayal in the highest circles of the Soviet Union as the reason for the defeat of the 41st, then everything falls into place. Hitler was not an idiot, and honestly fulfilled his part of the agreements, the defeat of the Red Army in the Battle of the Border. Which he was successfully set up for this defeat .. Expecting in response the elimination of Comrade Stalin and an immediate separate peace with his successor. Well - and apparently some other buns. It was for this option that Barbarossa was sharpened, for further on the Border Battle, no actions are even provided. But - it did not grow together, Comrade Stalin remained alive and at the head of state, and Aloizyevich found himself in the pose of a described poodle, having received a fierce war on the Eastern Front, in fig he did not need. Hence, all further throwing nemchura - I had to improvise, and in a tight time frame. True - one hell didn't help ..
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 42
      +1
      If we take into consideration the conspiracy theory about betrayal in the highest circles of the Soviet Union as the reason for the defeat of the 41st, then everything falls into place.


      I do not believe. negative
  • BISMARCK94
    BISMARCK94 April 26 2021 19: 15
    +3
    The author, the article is useful. It is sometimes worth reminding that Germany was not pressed by the USSR alone. Yes, the contribution of the USSR cannot be compared with others, but the coalition bit with Hitler in many places, forcing him to scatter his attention and resources. Here they say that without Lend-Lease they would have coped. Of course we would have done it, the question is when and at what cost.
    1. sevryuk
      sevryuk April 26 2021 19: 33
      +7
      Well, yes, well, yes ... 75% of the losses of the then EU - on the Eastern Front. That's all, actually, what you need to know about VM2.
      1. BISMARCK94
        BISMARCK94 April 26 2021 20: 27
        0
        Quote: sevryuk
        That's all, actually, what you need to know about VM2.

        Isn't this a selective storytelling?
      2. Avior
        Avior April 26 2021 23: 15
        +1
        This is an overly simplistic view.
        The history of the war is too complex to be reduced to the knowledge of one fact.
    2. parma
      parma April 28 2021 08: 32
      +1
      Quote: BISMARCK94
      The author, the article is useful. It is sometimes worth reminding that Germany was not pressed by the USSR alone. Yes, the contribution of the USSR cannot be compared with others, but the coalition bit with Hitler in many places, forcing him to scatter his attention and resources. Here they say that without Lend-Lease they would have coped. Of course we would have done it, the question is when and at what cost.

      The forces of the allies were proportional to the forces of the OSI in those regions where the battles were fought ... in North Africa, many millions of groups simply have nowhere to roam, the infrastructure does not allow ... therefore in Africa there were several hundred thousand soldiers on both sides, in Sicily and in Italy the number age already up to half a million (Italy is not the largest country even in Europe, millions of soldiers have nowhere to fight), in Normandy there were already millions (more space) ... the eastern front was thousands of kilometers, of course Germany was forced to keep huge forces in this direction .. ...
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 April 26 2021 19: 20
    +3
    The effect of the bombing began to manifest itself after the summer of 44. The evil genius Schacht worked, everything that could be hidden under the ground. The Germans began the war with serious reserves for industry. And how much good they got in a free Europe. If not for the heroism of a Soviet soldier who thwarted the plans of these Where would these England and the United States be? What kind of article is superficial and provocative, is it really how history is taught now?
    1. gsev
      gsev April 27 2021 00: 22
      +1
      Quote: tralflot1832
      The evil genius Shakhta worked, he hid everything that can be hidden under the ground.

      Until 1943, the Germans had enough to concentrate their fighters from Denmark to Normandy in order to neutralize any air raids from the British Isles. Plus, block the supply of food, anti-aircraft shells and aircraft to Malta. After 1943, fighters had to be allocated to cover raids on Romania, Bulgaria and Italy from Africa. That is, the Germans were able to concentrate three or four times less fighter forces during Allied raids.
    2. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 43
      0
      The effect of the bombing began to manifest itself after the summer of 44.


      Suddenly
      belay
  • borys
    borys April 26 2021 19: 31
    +8
    After reading the first paragraphs, a suspicion arose - already
    Isn't it Egorov? I read to the end. And there is! Run over
    to Belarus is not fashionable now, so I found a new topic.
    But as before, the articles of this author are left after
    reading filthy sediment.
  • Piligrim
    Piligrim April 26 2021 19: 38
    +7
    On June 22, Adolf Hitler "closed the encirclement" around the Third Reich. I understand he was planning something different, but that's exactly what happened. Britain had already blocked it from the ocean and the Mediterranean, but until June 22, it could trade with the USSR and through the USSR. After the start of "Barbarossa" the ring was closed. Enemies on all sides.


    The author, so why did the Fuhrer "close the ring", you can’t call him a complete fool?
    After all, logic says that being almost in the ring, it is more logical for him to have peace and friendship with the USSR and calmly march through the USSR to Iran and deprive Britain and the United States of oil there, and then India is close at hand. He, as if full of himself, drives himself into a ring. Maybe there is something very badly missing in your concept?
    1. Avior
      Avior April 26 2021 23: 21
      +2
      the fact that at the moment of the attack he closed the ring is an undoubted fact. But why he did it is a separate issue.
      it is more logical to have peace and friendship with the USSR and calmly and peacefully march through the USSR to Iran and there to deprive Britain and the United States of oil, and then India is at hand.

      I don't know if you know, but there were negotiations about this, but the parties did not come to an agreement
      The Pact of the Four Axis Powers is a draft treaty of friendship and economic support with the possibility of conducting joint hostilities against other countries, which was planned to be concluded between the USSR and the Axis countries at the end of 1940. The pact was aimed at creating a powerful military-political alliance and the actual military distribution of the Eastern Hemisphere of the planet between the signatory countries.
      1. gsev
        gsev April 27 2021 00: 30
        -1
        Quote: Avior
        I don't know if you know, but there were negotiations about this, but the parties did not come to an agreement

        If Hitler had not started a war against Poland, perhaps now German civilization would have been dominant in Europe. In the history of civilizations, the change of leaders took place as a result of economic competition. Russia, having defeated Napoleon and Hitler, failed to take a leading role when it lost the competition in genetics, cybernetics and then the scientific and technological revolution of the 1970s. So now the United States is foolishly spending resources in Afghanistan, in Ukraine while the PRC is increasing spending on science and R&D by 17 times.
        1. Avior
          Avior April 27 2021 13: 26
          +2
          If Hitler had not started a war against Poland

          If he had not reached an agreement with the USSR, he probably would not have started. Who knows.
          As for China, it is far from being a leader.
          So far, all of its development is in the mainstream of the EU and the States. And whether he can go further is a big question ...
          1. gsev
            gsev April 28 2021 22: 49
            +1
            Quote: Avior
            As for China, it is far from being a leader.

            Compare the 600 deaths from Covid in the United States with the 000 cases in the PRC and assess who is the leader? Remember when the last TV factory in the United States closed, and how many are there in the PRC?
            1. Avior
              Avior April 29 2021 03: 31
              +1
              Independent sources will confirm the number of forged victims in China - then the topic of conversation will appear
              1. gsev
                gsev April 29 2021 15: 46
                +1
                Quote: Avior
                Independent sources of casualties of forging in China

                Does the Hopkins Institute's data differ greatly from the data of the Chinese Baidu? You remember that a year ago Trump assured the whole world that the PRC is not capable of independently dealing with Covid without the help of the United States, and for the provision of American medical care, the PRC will accept all the conditions of the United States. Now, not the United States, but the PRC supplies the largest number of doses of vaccine to the third countries. the world.
  • Andy
    Andy April 26 2021 19: 42
    +10
    "We in the USSR, fortunately, at least do not know what a carpet bombing is."
    ----
    sorry to minus the article is impossible. 23 August 1942 raid on Stalingrad. by the author - "all is well, beautiful marquise"
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 33
      -1
      "We in the USSR, fortunately, at least do not know what a carpet bombing is."
      ----
      sorry to minus the article is impossible. 23 August 1942 raid on Stalingrad. by the author - "all is well, beautiful marquise"


      Now imagine being bombed like that all large cities of the USSR
      Constantly
      Submitted?
      1. gsev
        gsev April 28 2021 22: 54
        +1
        Quote: Olezhek
        Now imagine that all the major cities of the USSR are bombed like this.

        Compare the number of all Japanese killed in the bombing with the number of Soviet citizens killed in Leningrad alone, and imagine that everywhere east of the Bug, the war was gathering no less casualties.
        1. Olezhek
          April 29 2021 07: 07
          +1
          Compare the number of all Japanese killed in the bombing with the number of Soviet citizens killed in Leningrad alone


          And what prevented the Red Army from preventing the blockade of Leningrad?
          1. gsev
            gsev April 29 2021 15: 33
            +1
            Quote: Olezhek
            And what prevented the Red Army from preventing the blockade of Leningrad?

            Inability to fight at the beginning of the war. For this reason, Great Britain generally surrendered Poland, France, Burma and Singapore. The USA surrendered Indonesia and the Philippines.
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion April 30 2021 21: 59
      -1
      The Germans never had 500-1000 heavy bombers per city in one sortie. Stalingrad was destroyed by the battles in it, the German aviation never reached such a large city to be bombed.
  • Dkuznecov
    Dkuznecov April 26 2021 20: 03
    0
    The meaning is clear. But it can be clearly traced
    lack of tables, data, dry statistics.
    Graphs, diagrams.
    If available, the article would be invaluable,
    if everything is written correctly.
    1. Olezhek
      April 28 2021 08: 55
      +1
      The meaning is clear. But it can be clearly traced
      lack of tables, data, dry statistics.
      Graphs, diagrams.


      Then the book must be written. fellow
      But laziness. am
      1. Dkuznecov
        Dkuznecov April 29 2021 00: 01
        +1
        It is necessary! Personally, I am shocked by the calculations,
        logical in my opinion, even more logicalThan
        were served and are being served to us now (and earlier) officially.
        Not enough numbers, although lend-lease supplies
        painted to the last shoe lace in the documents.
        An interesting commercial question, how much and to whom USA
        sold military and paramilitary products in World War II.
        As far as I understand, Germany and satellites too.
        How much, at what price, where it was delivered.
        For example, the fact of ferrying is rarely mentioned.
        more than three thousand aircraft from the USA to the USSR
        through Vladivostok. a ferry regiment was formed with us.
        Also an interesting fact.
        In general, as Zhiglov said, small details, they are worth a lot.
  • Baron pardus
    Baron pardus April 26 2021 20: 08
    +7
    The defeat of Germany was predetermined when Germany decided to fight on two fronts. Not finishing England (????) attacked the USSR. Germany was warned against a war on two fronts by Bismarck. The Germans are generally a mystery. We saw in front of us the example of Napoleon (who decided to fight with Russia from some obkur or hangover without finishing off England), and jumped on the same rake not ONE time, but TWO.
    Until now, no one can CLEARLY explain what parishes were not for the night before the aforementioned Adolf that he did not finish off the Angles in Dunkirk, did not throw all the Air Force on the "Battle over England" which Germany COULD win if they threw all their forces at The British) and turned his back on the British (which should NEVER be done) and attacked the USSR with his own hands, creating a war on two fronts for himself.
    There are no answers to this question. Hitler knew about Napoleon's fatal decision, Hitler could not help but know Bismarck's warnings, Hitler fought in WWI and saw the results of the war on two fronts (although THEN Germany inflicted defeat after defeat on the Russian Empire, which is not surprising, even tiny Japan that had just got out of the dense Middle Ages, betrayed the rotten dirt in the corruption of the Russian Empire such sickly people that are still impressive), but Germany then LOST the war. Having won a bunch of battles, including the Battle of Jutland.
    The author is right when he says that you need to watch from Berlin ... but forgets what to watch .... and from LONDON. But the secret of Germany's defeat is not that "Great, invincible America, chosen by God" entered the war. Americans go to war only when they are 100% sure that they will win. And on the side that wins. Having preliminarily made a fortune by supplying weapons to both sides (See "Trading with the Enemy"), and by waiting for BOTH sides to weaken each other well
    "If we see that Germany begins to win, we will help Russia, if we see that Russia will win, we will help Germany, and let them kill each other more ... The post-war world should belong to the Anglo-Saxons" - "Friend of the Soviet People" - Franklin Delano Roosevelt. With such "friends" enemies are not needed at all.
    The mystery of Germany's defeat, in Hitler's decision to jump on the rake of war on two fronts, which was made AFTER he let the British leave Dunkirk and AFTER Rudolf Hess "fled" to England.
    What really happened behind the scenes, we most likely will not find out. There are many theories, including Starikov's work, but they are all "swing on indirect". Too many documents have been destroyed or lost. Too much will be classified by ENGLAND before 1945.
    And about the failures of 1943 and others. Well, it is impossible for 18 years after the end of the civil war to overcome those 50-100 years for which the Russian Empire lagged behind the Western countries. I'm tired of repeating. In 1914, literacy in RI was ... 27% ... 27, Karl. There was a subway in London, exactly the same year when serfdom was abolished in Russia (slavery for its own). Having visited England, some of the Russian Grand Dukes said "We are forever behind." But under Stalin's leadership, even in spite of numerous conspiracies, even in spite of active opposition on the ground, the USSR almost, almost caught up with, and reduced the retirement from 50 years to 3-5 years. We must not forget about the conspiracies of the generals. Some of the generals said to Vlasov at the very beginning of the war, "If the Germans win, neither you nor me will be any worse."
    World War II was a war of motors. And in the USSR, a person who completed 6 classes was considered educated. (in 1914 a person was considered educated if he could write and read in general, much like in China during the heyday of the Qin dynasty). They simply did not know how to handle technology, and they simply did not know how to produce it. Many authors have written about this. And about the culture of production, and about the culture of use. You can quote paragraphs about "Because of the" skillful pens "of the service personnel at the airfields, every kilometer per hour was lost, every m / s of climb rate, every horsepower suffered in KB .... no one at the airfield even thinks about sealing, and the surfaces have not been polished since the aircraft left the workshop. " Of course, this is a progress from the ingenious tsarist admiral who issued exactly before the WWII "Electric spark plugs for submarines in France are not expensive to buy, put ours, wax". But still.
    And it's not just about airplanes. The SVT-40 was a welcome trophy for the Finns and Germans. But in the SA, the same SVT 40 was scolded for being capricious. Both the Germans and ours fought in the same conditions, but for some reason the SVT worked for the Germans, (for the Finns too), but for ours it was reputed to be capricious.
    The Soviet generals had a civil experience before their eyes, which was strikingly different from the positional meat grinder of the PMV. Therefore, while Germany, England and France were accumulating one experience, the whites and ours were accumulating ALL another.
    Let me remind you that Germany had been at war for 1941 years by 2. And before that, they had similar shoals, when during a HIKE (not a battle, but a HIKE) to Vienna, almost 50% of the tanks were out of order for technical reasons.
    You can write for a long time. But the reasons for Germany's defeat must be looked for in Berlin and London, since it was there that the idea of ​​"jumping the rake" was born, creating a war on two fronts with your own paws ... Again ... Despite Bismarck's warning, the fate of Napoleon (by the way, in ANALOGUE before fucking out the situation - England was left in the rear), and on my own experience of WWI.
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 April 26 2021 22: 14
      +5
      "The Germans are generally a mystery." Yes, there is no mystery. Never before has Western Europe accumulated such power for the march of the East as Hitler did. The plans were overloaded with interest. And the "open spaces" were not supposed to save. But .. this is by the standards of the "European" war. And then the "Scythians" decided to resist "uncivilized". After all, they have been defeated! As many as 3 times! Border battle, Kiev, Bryansk-Vyazma! And not capitulating, disorder! not fair! They wrote everything correctly above - the heroism of the Soviet soldier and the peoples of the USSR as a whole - that's what ultimately made it possible to resist. That same collective "Unknown Soldier" is our Main Military Secret.
      1. Baron pardus
        Baron pardus April 26 2021 22: 26
        0
        I would agree with you, if not for one thing. Japan. How many millions of Red Army soldiers surrendered without much resistance? How many were the Vlasovites? And how many generals openly or not engaged in sabotage? And how many "party functionaries" or simply "party comrades" were engaged in sabotage and subversive activities?
        Now let's compare with Japan. And how many Japanese soldiers surrendered almost without a fight, or went over to the US side with the cry of "America without Democracy"? What heroism the Japanese soldiers and officers showed, one can only bow to such a thing. A history teacher told us about Onoda in 1990 ... This did not save Japan from defeat. Heroism by itself does not win a war. It, of course, matters, but only as a complex with weapons systems and military leadership. You can talk to me about blacks against Italian tankettes as much as you want, yes, the blacks did not run away, but they destroyed the tankettes, but who lets the reckless tankettes, undisguised by the infantry, into close combat with the enemy infantry ?? By the way, you say "the whole of Europe", but with Napoleon not "all of Europe" came to Russia? Everything, except England, as in the Great Patriotic War. And documents classified in England until 1945, including the protocols of Hess's negotiations with the British, keep many secrets.
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 April 27 2021 11: 20
          +2
          And I in no way stress on individual patriotism / heroism. But with other approximately equal efforts ("the generals planned, planned, but did not plan") Soviet soldiers fought selflessly - and the number of such was much greater than the number on the "other side." It's easy not to give up when your side wins and hurts your opponent. It's hard not to be captured when everything is disorganized, broken, without ammunition, without food. The number of enemy prisoners in 1944-1945 is comparable to ours in 1941-42 .. But those who crashed into the enemy column in a tank without shells, the enemy had an order of magnitude less, if not 2 orders of magnitude. Our technical mistakes in military construction are sad, for which we had to pay in great blood. Glory to our grandfathers, great-grandfathers, who overcame all this at the cost of their lives. This is not a celebration of stupidity corrected by heroism. This is just a reasonable explanation of the end result, and the factor that tipped the scales in our favor.
      2. Olezhek
        April 27 2021 21: 44
        0
        The Germans are generally a mystery. "Yes, there is no mystery. Never before has Western Europe accumulated such power for a campaign in the East, as Hitler did. The plans were more than replenished.

        belay
    2. Kronos
      Kronos April 26 2021 23: 56
      0
      Napaleon could not finish off England because Russia broke the blockade that was destructive for the Russian economy. Russia, by the way, and so planned to start another anti-French coalition, only Bonaparte decided to strike first without learning the lessons from the confrontation with the people of Spain. In Dunkirk, the Nazis did their best, could it be the myth of the stop order? Goering lost the battle for England, promising Hitler that the German aviation could not implement.
  • samarin1969
    samarin1969 April 26 2021 20: 09
    +6
    The author has written too much to disassemble "by the bones". But the thesis about the strategic defeat of Hitler's empire in the 41st is unacceptable. Everything was decided somewhere on the embankment of Stalingrad.
    And not the resources "won", but the sacrifice of ordinary soldiers of the USSR.
    If not for Hitler's ideological preferences, the war could have developed differently. At 42m, turn on the "Model mode" along the entire Eastern Front, and transfer Manstein with tanks and air fleets directly against Great Britain. There were already quite a few nations and states in the world that would have supported the "destroyer of the British prison of nations."
    There was no predetermination of victory for the Allies in this war.
  • Krasnoyarsk
    Krasnoyarsk April 26 2021 20: 18
    +7
    = The USSR did not have to smash the Wehrmacht right away, it was enough just to "hold the front", and the Reich itself would suffocate. =
    Well what can I say? I cannot understand the author. He's probably a Mars resident.
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 51
      +1
      = The USSR did not have to smash the Wehrmacht right away, it was enough just to "hold the front", and the Reich itself would suffocate.


      Consider stopping the Wehrmacht in the summer of 41
      in Ukraine and Belarus
      And the transition to trench warfare.
      Or semi-positional
      Read the consequences.
      1. Krasnoyarsk
        Krasnoyarsk April 28 2021 08: 50
        +1
        Quote: Olezhek
        Consider stopping the Wehrmacht in the summer of 41

        It is foolish to consider the option - whether it will snow or not if it has already fallen. There are no options. The Red Army did not have the strength and ability to stop the Wehrmacht in 41. It was possible to stop them only in the fall of the 42nd. Or do you want to say that there were forces and means, but the Germans were deliberately allowed deep into the territory of the USSR?
        1. Olezhek
          April 28 2021 08: 53
          -1
          It is foolish to consider the option - whether it will snow or not if it has already fallen. There are no options. The Red Army did not have the strength and ability to stop the Wehrmacht in 41.


          Then you have to give up.
          If it is impossible even to stop the enemy with adequate losses of people and territory.
          1. Krasnoyarsk
            Krasnoyarsk April 28 2021 08: 56
            +2
            Quote: Olezhek
            Then you have to give up.

            Well, you gave up, but we didn't. We retreated until we gained strength and ABILITY.
            1. Olezhek
              April 28 2021 09: 03
              +1
              We retreated until we gained strength


              By this you apparently mean the surrender of the regular Red Army in the summer of 41?

              In 41 (over half a year) we were taken prisoner, according to various sources, from 3,3 to 3,9 million of ours. The most reliable number (based on the report of the Wehrmacht command, and not on the correspondence of German officials far from the war) - 3,35 million
              1. Krasnoyarsk
                Krasnoyarsk April 28 2021 11: 53
                -1
                Quote: Olezhek

                By this you apparently mean the surrender of the regular Red Army in the summer of 41?

                In the sense of your words, it turns out like this - Someone deliberately surrendered the personnel of the Red Army prisoner.
                What is the name?
                1. Olezhek
                  April 28 2021 20: 27
                  +1
                  In the sense of your words, it turns out like this - Someone deliberately surrendered the personnel of the Red Army prisoner.
                  What is the name?


                  Will you deny the fact that the cadre Red Army was defeated in 41 and was largely taken prisoner?
                  And that the prisoners immediately began to be considered millions?
                  And how could this lead to "strengthening"?
                  1. Krasnoyarsk
                    Krasnoyarsk April 28 2021 20: 50
                    -1
                    Quote: Olezhek

                    Will you deny the fact that the cadre Red Army was defeated in 41 and was largely taken prisoner?

                    Will. And who then stopped the German near Moscow, Tula and other cities? Only the militias? Military construction battalions, unarmed, building defensive structures on the Western border and taken prisoner, is this a regular army?
                    1. Olezhek
                      April 29 2021 07: 09
                      +1
                      Will you deny the fact that the cadre Red Army was defeated in 41 and was largely taken prisoner?


                      Will. And who then stopped the German near Moscow


                      Yes, your division ...
                      Even sad.
                      1. Krasnoyarsk
                        Krasnoyarsk April 29 2021 08: 01
                        -1
                        Quote: Olezhek

                        Yes, your division ...
                        Even sad.

                        Is it sad that no matter what, you still won? Well then, sadness alone.
                    2. EvilLion
                      EvilLion April 30 2021 21: 54
                      0
                      And there, in fact, a new army was created.
          2. K.O.S.
            K.O.S. April 28 2021 20: 51
            +1
            Read about the plan "Ost" and you will understand that in that war for us there could be neither defeat nor surrender nor anything else there - there could only be either victory or death of the third one.
        2. EvilLion
          EvilLion April 30 2021 21: 57
          +1
          That is, there was no Red Army offensive near Moscow? Historians in the know?
    2. Dkuznecov
      Dkuznecov April 29 2021 00: 11
      +1
      He says everything correctly. All these counter-attacks are over
      boilers and simply the death of infantry under the MG-37 and mortars.
      My diggers opened a nest near Mamaev Kurgan.
      6 bags of potato shells were pulled out from under MG 37 or 42.
      And opposite the nest is a field. Bare field. How many lay there, no one knows.
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion April 30 2021 21: 56
        0
        Apparently, no one, if not a single corpse was dug up. And the casings were collected there after the battle, since brass is expensive, but, apparently, they could not pass it.
        1. Dkuznecov
          Dkuznecov April 30 2021 22: 00
          0
          I think the fallow field has been used for decades.
          They plowed everything up.
          Or they put them in a mass grave.
  • Sergei 777
    Sergei 777 April 26 2021 21: 34
    +1
    Confused article. Horses, people.
  • BAI
    BAI April 26 2021 21: 41
    +1
    А 11 December Adolf Hitler declared war on the United States. Everything. After that, the general strategic situation for the Germans became absolutely hopeless.

    November 29 1941 Reichs Minister of Armaments and Ammunition Fritz Todt:
    "My Fuhrer, the war must be stopped immediately, since we have already lost it militarily and economically."

    BEFORE US ENTERING THE WAR.
    1. Avior
      Avior April 26 2021 23: 26
      +1
      The USA actually entered the war much earlier on the side of England
      The Lend Lisa agreement was signed almost a year earlier, it was just more convenient for the States to deliver resources to England in a neutral status
  • andrew42
    andrew42 April 26 2021 21: 59
    +6
    The author just wants to say "Oxtis!" Small, unhappy Germany with "surrounded" Hitler - it is necessary to look through binoculars on the contrary. In fact, this is a huge German Euro-Reich, which got the whole industry of Europe, the natural resources of all continental Europe, including the resources of Scandinavia, human resources, plus the Swiss "trading platform", plus, before the US entered the war, it was quite a German communications worker. fleet (except that the Bismarck was not lost from a great mind). This is not a "fortress", it is an Empire, before the explosion of the subsequent expansion, "competently" aimed at the Soviet Union. Is Britain cooler than Hitler's European Union? - Oh well. Especially after the Japanese colonial kicks! - The Britons did not know how to defend Australia, I remembered the American documentary film "Pacific" about American boys hastily thrown to defend Australia. The British colonial system was seriously cut, east of India simply evaporated. Objectively, in the summer of 1941, nothing could save Britain from Hitler's invasion. One third of the resources of "Barbarossa" would be enough for Hitler to enter London in 1 weeks as Guillaume-Norman. From the point of view of geo-strategy, Hitler did according to his mind, crushed half of the continent, and did not begin to finish off Britain, because in the summer of 3 Britain was not capable of stabbing him in the back at all. And Hitler was in a hurry, by 3 the Red Army would have completed rearmament and reorganization. Even without the shadow conspiracy of the Western elites, Hitler acted like a competent "karateka" - he did not bend over to finish off Britain with the edge of his hand, but turned and kicked the main designated enemy, the USSR, in the groin. A little bit of strength was not enough, and our Faberge turned out to be stronger than that of the other previous rivals, by an order of magnitude.
    1. Baron pardus
      Baron pardus April 26 2021 22: 31
      +4
      The opponent is down on one knee, you need to finish off not with the edge of your palm, but you need to carry out the "Shining Wizard". More effective, efficient and dramatic.

      And the author of this opus, lamenting about "a little Germany fighting heroically on all fronts in spite of everything, with a purely Aryan fatalism" reminds me of Kolya from Urengoy. I am waiting for the author to finish the article with the words "Forgive us, Nazis"
      1. Olezhek
        April 27 2021 21: 22
        0
        And the author of this opus, lamenting about "a little Germany fighting heroically on all fronts in spite of everything, with purely Aryan fatalism" reminds me of Kolya from Urengoy


        And you will in principle deny the higher combat effectiveness of the German army?
        Study the statistics on casualties and prisoners of war.
        You will be very surprised.
      2. Dkuznecov
        Dkuznecov April 29 2021 00: 21
        0
        You have a strange associative array.
        Although gaps signal that you are under
        minimum, alcoholic influence.
        It was not the Nazis who fought. Businesses were at war.
        It is enough to ask who owned
        de facto industry in Germany.
        And why it wasn't bombed. All these Goebbels slogans are populism,
        like Zhirinovsky with us. Carries game, people like it.
        The question of who started (turned on the key) at the engine of war
        like on a toy railroad track.
        1. Olezhek
          April 29 2021 07: 11
          +1
          You have a strange associative array.

          It was not the Nazis who fought. Businesses fought.


          My cry and bang my head against the wall. crying
        2. andrew42
          andrew42 4 May 2021 11: 51
          0
          About Goebbels and Zhirik, - smiled. The scale is certainly different, but the manner of propaganda is very similar.
    2. K.O.S.
      K.O.S. April 26 2021 23: 05
      -1
      Only they did not use these resources, in 1945, 1,5 million French fought on the side of the Allies, but how many French fought for the Germans in the whole war?
      1. Mitroha
        Mitroha April 27 2021 06: 47
        +3
        Quote: K.O.S.
        Only they did not use these resources, in 1945, 1,5 million French fought on the side of the Allies, but how many French fought for the Germans in the whole war?

        I will not dispute your figure, in 1945 it was necessary to be repulsed tightly in order to fight for the Nazis, when they have already lost 100% and your country is being cleaned of them ... just tell me, France was captured in 1940, how many French fought for the allies from 1940 to 1943, and how many for the Germans in the same period? Why, with so many militant Frenchmen, did they surrender their country in two weeks?
        1. K.O.S.
          K.O.S. April 27 2021 12: 46
          +2
          If we take together those who fought for the Germans and those who were on the side of the Allies, then this is a minuscule compared to how many French just sat out at home.
    3. EvilLion
      EvilLion April 30 2021 21: 53
      0
      I can see how the Germans, under the fire of British battleships, sail across the English Channel. How can you even believe in this nonsense about the landing.
  • K.O.S.
    K.O.S. April 26 2021 22: 56
    -1
    On one coast of France, the Germans held 27 divisions (and on the entire Atlantic rampart from Norway to the south of France 44 divisions), plus Rommel's 7 divisions (130 thousand soldiers) in Africa and most of the Italian army (236 thousand soldiers on November 9, 1942 ) in the same place. This is only part of the dry numbers that the author did not give in the article - and there were also the Balkans along with Greece (and in aviation, there are even more interesting figures, and so on) and, this at a time when our grandfathers were holding out their last strength near Moscow and in Stalingrad.
  • Andrey Zhdanov-Nedilko
    Andrey Zhdanov-Nedilko April 26 2021 23: 05
    +5
    It read interesting, but there is a revision of the Second World War. And the point of view is interesting - a view from Berlin! It's ridiculous about our USSR - it was possible not to fight, but only to defend! ... Yeah, I've read all kinds of things, but that's it! ... Stunned. That, it turns out, it was possible to retreat, save strength, knowing that victory would be ours ... and retreat to Kamchatka, and then defend the western coast of Kamchatka from the Germans, and the east from the Japanese? The author's logic is strange. The neo-reunist regiment has arrived!
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 24
      +1
      And the point of view is interesting - a view from Berlin!


      And it’s easier. everything looks more logical
      Military operations in Europe were planned from Berlin ...
      What is the problem?


      It's funny about our USSR - it was possible not to fight, but only to defend!


      That is, defense is not war?
      belay
  • Far B
    Far B April 27 2021 00: 17
    +4
    I read it - and, really, I went nuts. But he read persistently (the mice cried, injected, but continued to eat the cactus, yeah). But on this I broke down:
    We in the USSR, fortunately, at least do not know what "carpet bombing" is
    Author! Tell the same Stalingraders about this!
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 25
      0
      Author! Tell the same Stalingraders about this!


      Stalingrad - a front-line city
      And the Germans and Japanese had nowhere to run at all.
      They bombed almost everything.
  • Siegfried
    Siegfried April 27 2021 00: 50
    +4
    it is not entirely clear what exactly is meant? That Hitler miscalculated or that England did not allow him to defeat the USSR? If we take the perspective of Berlin, then Hitler miscalculated by appointing Goering's opiushnik as commander of the Air Force. He ineptly squandered the Air Force over the La Manche, which then affected the strike capabilities of the Luftwaffe in Russia. Yes, England clipped Germany's wings and possibly saved the USSR, because here Hitler lacked quite a bit, to be honest. The decision to attack the USSR was in that situation the only correct one for Germany. In fact, the USSR was actually saved, not symbolically, by a couple of hundred cadets, individual KV-1 tanks and a host of other heroes. Many people say, but if Hitler did not turn to Kiev, if only it was not that, all this post factum is easy to condemn. Then the Wehrmacht did everything correctly enough, but did not fit into the turn, and then it was too late. The merit of England in this context is only the destruction of about 400 bomber crews and many fighter pilots (their number did not play a special role in Russia in 41, since air superiority was already achieved in the main directions). In 41, the USSR, in fact, alone opposed Europe and very much in the butt all the same fit into the very turn from which Hitler left the race. To say that Barbarossa was obviously a mistake can only be sitting on the couch in the year 2021. Barbarossa had every chance of success, and then Germany would not be surrounded by enemies, but become a continental superpower, black times would come for the peoples of Eastern Europe.
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 45
      +2
      The decision to attack the USSR in that situation was the only correct one for Germany.


      Strongly disagree. negative
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion April 30 2021 21: 51
        0
        The problem is that without victory over the USSR, there is no way out of the war, since tales about the surrender of Britain under the dominance of the British fleet are nothing more than fairy tales. And to fight for 20 years, throwing bombs - so the USSR will go ahead during this time.
  • Cer59
    Cer59 April 27 2021 01: 25
    +1
    They don't like to talk about it somehow. yes, quite a lot has been written and said about this. the reason is simple ... the forces that were involved are really insignificant in the scope of actions on the Eastern Front. but about submarine warfare and the huge resources aimed at it, you indicated correctly ...
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 April 27 2021 11: 41
      0
      Figuratively speaking, this is perfectly formulated in Rasteryaev's verses:
      On the crying earth without smelling boots
      Our bloodless squad escapes from enemies
      Feeding on the go with oxalis leaf
      Sleeping in a gully under a viburnum bush

      We can’t rest - run, run, run
      And our supposedly friends sat down over the hill
      And they watch how they beat us without taking their eyes off

      And only long roads are completely for us.

      Not even spicy enough, I would say.
      1. Olezhek
        April 27 2021 22: 00
        +1
        We can’t rest - run, run, run
        And our supposedly friends sat down over the hill
        And they watch how they beat us without taking their eyes off


        And gentlemen, the Anglo-Saxons, as if the USSR did not owe anything
        It's a shame, I understand
        But they cynically acted in their own interests
        And they did not intend to "lay their heads for the freedom of Orthodox Christians in the Balkans"
        Cynically, yes.
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion April 30 2021 21: 49
          +1
          Like the USSR, to save the Poles, the French and other suckers. Which they still cannot forgive Stalin.
  • Eug
    Eug April 27 2021 07: 02
    +2
    The same Americans easily bypassed the so-called "blockade" by trading with Germany through "neutral" countries. If I am not mistaken, the annual consumption of butter in "neutral" Switzerland has grown 750 times. But where did Germany get money for trade? Let's remember the Anschluss of Austria and Czechoslovakia, not the poorest countries at that time, and the gold reserves of Czechoslovakia transferred to Germany from British (!) Banks. The author's point of view is not new, I. Bunich wrote about the role of the British "stranglehold" and the economic-industrial power of the United States as "decisive" military-strategic factors in his book "Operation Thunderstorm".
    1. Avior
      Avior April 27 2021 23: 03
      +1
      Imports to Switzerland fell sharply during the war
      during World War II, imports fell from 30% of the national product (average in the late 1920s) to 9%, exports from 25% to 9%.
  • podymych
    podymych April 27 2021 08: 54
    +2
    Actually, it would be nice for the author to consider the "big" war of little Hungary and Romania, and not the smallest Italy, where Duce was very disappointed that the Italians were not those "Romans" from ancient times. In Budapest, people were sitting in cafes, and on Balaton the sanatoriums were not closed, almost before our tanks appeared on the streets, and the war for the "decent" public was about as far away as for many of our Afghans, and Chechnya also...
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid April 27 2021 09: 29
      +3
      Everyone thought that, according to the author's logic, there would be words that the war brought grief to everyone, not just the Soviet People, that there were deaths on both sides. That is, just such a liberal blizzard appears every year on the eve of MAY 9. to earn so that new generations would repent and ask for forgiveness.
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 April 27 2021 10: 46
    +3
    But Hitler "from the outside" did not have to wait for anything good
    At Hitler's service were the colossal resources of Europe, captured entirely, which the Germans did not even have time to digest. It was more than enough for a couple of years.
    And on December 11, Adolf Hitler declared war on the United States. Everything. After that, the general strategic situation for the Germans became absolutely hopeless.
    We know this now. And then the calculation was very useful. As soon as the "colossus with feet of clay" falls, European industry will immediately be loaded with resources from the fallen USSR. And all world trade, spoiled by Britain, will simply not be necessary to Hitler.
    We in the USSR, fortunately, at least do not know what "carpet bombing" is.
    Nicely! To tell this to a resident of Smolensk, which was then turned, apparently by non-carpet bombing, into small rubble entirely (everything that now makes up the "historical center" of Smolensk was rebuilt by the hands of German prisoners) ... the author is lucky that he is far away. Otherwise, you can not keep your hands with you ...
    In a word, the "eye opening" session did not take place. The conclusions of the author are, to say the least, incorrect. The author sees all this "horror" very badly for the Germans. More precisely, he looks through the training manual ...
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 27
      +1
      Hitler had at his service the colossal resources of Europe, captured entirely, which the Germans did not even have time to digest.


      So tell us about the gigantic raw material resources of Europe.
      And without raw materials, factories somehow do not work.
      Raw materials to Europe (before and after WWII) came mainly through seaports.
      Or do you think they lived there on the grass?
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion April 30 2021 21: 48
        0
        Nevertheless, the Germans held out in terms of resources until mid-1944.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 28 2021 11: 39
      +1
      Quote: Mikhail3
      At Hitler's service were the colossal resources of Europe, captured entirely, which the Germans did not even have time to digest. It was more than enough for a couple of years.

      EMNIP, in the analysis of the actions of the US bomber aviation in Europe in the part devoted to the fuel of the Reich, was a monthly schedule of fuel reserves in the Reich. The reserves accumulated before Barabarossa evaporated during the six months of the war in the East.
      Quote: Mikhail3
      We know this now. And then the calculation was very useful. As soon as the "colossus with feet of clay" falls, European industry will immediately be loaded with resources from the fallen USSR.

      The calculation could be considered conditionally valid if the Reich declared war on the United States in the summer of 1941 - when it was still possible to hope for the imminent fall of the USSR.
      And to declare war on the Yankees, when the decisive offensive in 1941 in the East failed, and the Wehrmacht rolled back near Moscow, Rostov and Tikhvin - this is a transfer of the situation from just shitty to "horror-horror-horror".
      Quote: Mikhail3
      To tell this to a resident of Smolensk, which was then turned, apparently by non-carpet bombing, into small rubble entirely (everything that now makes up the "historical center" of Smolensk was rebuilt by the hands of German prisoners) ... the author is lucky that he is far away.

      And what, Smolensk was deep in the rear and was demolished by air strikes? Or is it transformation of urban development into rubble was the result of battles in the city during the defense and subsequent liberation?
      Carpet bombing is when there is no rear at all. When on any night any city can be visited by 400-600-800-1000 bombers and demolished buildings and / or enterprises. Adapted to the realities of the USSR carpet bombing - this is when the Ural Aluminum Plant, Tankograd, UZTM, etc. may be under attack. Or when the car plant in Gorky is demolished along with the city.
      The Germans were able to do something like that only in Stalingrad - and then only because the front line approached the city, so that it was within the radius of the front-line aviation.
  • Tavrik
    Tavrik April 27 2021 11: 14
    +4
    Quote: astepanov
    The USSR waged war not only against Germany, but also against France with its very good industry (how the French suddenly found themselves among the winners - another question), and against Romania with its oil, and against Czechoslovakia with powerful military-industrial production, and against Poland and Hungary (also not the weakest countries in Europe).

    Well, then, for the sake of fairness on our part, we must remember Britain, the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, etc. Having said "A", it is necessary to say "B".
  • Tavrik
    Tavrik April 27 2021 11: 22
    +3
    Quote: gsev
    Russia, having defeated Napoleon and Hitler, could not take the leading role when it lost the competition in genetics,

    The lag in genetics that occurred after the defeat of Napoleon, Russia tried to eliminate by means of military settlements in which a special breed of military settlers was brought out. laughing
  • yehat2
    yehat2 April 27 2021 11: 37
    +3
    Quote: article author
    The USSR did not have to smash the Wehrmacht like this right away

    Mr. Egorov, you don't know history at all, but you are trying to write about events.
    Obviously, your article is based on several low-quality English-language articles.
    I will describe it using the specified example.
    Indeed, from the point of view of the British, the Red Army was enough to keep the defense, but there are several "NO"
    firstly, the Germans occupied a significant territory that fed and supplied the country and the country was constantly depleted. The USSR did not have colonies to calmly wait out the conflict.
    Secondly, the Germans occupied a significant number of the population and pursued a policy of genocide.
    The USSR could not afford to just wait, because we know that as a result of the war, Germany actually burned out half of Belarus and caused a lot of other damage.
    the total losses of the USSR increased several times due to the mass death of the civilian population, they are estimated
    not less than 12 million. And in these conditions to wait? This explains the facts of haste with counterattacks, conducted in difficult and not always favorable conditions, greatly increasing the losses of the army, but at the same time retaining much more civilians.
    I just showed with 1 example how the author DOES NOT UNDERSTAND what he has the audacity to write about.
    accordingly, the entire article is a hell of a bunch of completely incorrect conclusions and interpretations about the war.
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 29
      +1
      Indeed, from the point of view of the British, the Red Army was enough to keep the defense, but there are several "NO"
      firstly, the Germans occupied a significant territory


      If the Red Army "successfully held the defense" then there simply would not be such significant occupied territories.
      Something like that. request
      1. K.O.S.
        K.O.S. April 27 2021 22: 51
        +1
        If the Red Army had time to prepare for war and not spread along the border, then yes it is possible
      2. yehat2
        yehat2 April 28 2021 09: 26
        0
        by May 1941, it was clear that the Red Army would not be able to hold the line.
        and the first reason is the balance of power. by June 22, the Reich and the allies had a little more than 8 million army on the border of the USSR, more than 11.5 in total. In the most rosy estimates, the Red Army had 3 million at the border. And I will remind you that back in 39, the entire Red Army was only 1.6 million, i.e. a significant part of the army was poorly trained and without combat experience.
        If it was a narrow front, as in Italy, the Red Army would have coped, but keeping the front for 4 thousand km was physically impossible without total mobilization.
        By the way, a very similar situation emerged in 44 - the Red Army entered Europe not as numerous as it might seem - there were only about 5.5-6 million local.
        And the Germans, when they surrendered, even then had about 8 million under arms (together with self-defense units)
        I'm just showing how difficult it was in terms of the banal numbers.
        And the tragic events near Balaton were caused precisely by the fact that the personnel were so tight that even knowing in advance about the German strike, they could not allocate adequate reserves for defense.
        So the reproaches are that ""
        Quote: Olezhek
        if the red army "successfully held the defense"

        just out of place, generally speaking.
        And in private, of course, there were enough idiots. For example, the disaster in Feodosia, when they lost half of the Kaliningrad region just like that, or the disgusting planning of the offensive of the 2nd shock Vlasov near Rzhev. As for the boilers near Kiev, Smolensk and in a number of other places, despite the defeat, the Red Army did a lot.
        1. Olezhek
          2 May 2021 08: 48
          0
          by May 1941, it was clear that the Red Army would not be able to hold the line.


          Already by December 44, it became clear that the Americans (with complete superiority in l / s and technology) could not hold the defense in the Ardennes against the German old people and adolescents.
        2. yehat2
          yehat2 4 May 2021 09: 17
          -1
          I did the ochipatka. not Kaliningrad, but Krasnodar
  • Petrik66
    Petrik66 April 27 2021 12: 52
    +2
    In 1940, the Germans screwed up at "Battle of England", but not so disastrously, let's face it. To say that the allies landed in Africa in November and it could not be otherwise ?! In 1942, the Allies had nothing to fight in Europe against the Germans. Rommel chased the English through the desert like mangy dogs. And in England this was the main front. The coolest field marshal is El Alameinsky. The lack of resources among the Germans in Africa due to the eastern front is key. They lost in 42 ????? The breakthrough of the Germans to the Caucasus, Turkey, which has scores with the British since the First World War, gets into the war, Iran and Iraq are in the hands of the Germans. I'm not sure that this would immediately solve the problem of the Germans with fuel, but the fact that the British would have burned everything badly is a fact. Italy - how many forces did the Germans have there in 1943? The Italian theater of military operations is extremely inconvenient for an offensive, mountains, lack of freedom of maneuver ........ there was no particular success among the allies. The USA will decide everything - the main message of the article. They decided with japas until the age of 45. The article is provocative and I think that the author is not interested in a different opinion.
    1. K.O.S.
      K.O.S. April 27 2021 13: 23
      +1
      The Germans could crush the Britons already in 1940, and they did not even have to land on the islands - it was enough to send troops to Morocco and block Gibraltar from there, a month later all the British troops in Egypt and Malta bent down and the Germans would have received the Suez Canal and access to oil-bearing Middle East. Why the Germans did not do this is still a mystery.
      1. Avior
        Avior April 27 2021 14: 17
        0
        they could not send troops to Morocco, a strong British fleet would quickly cut off their supplies
        And they failed to capture Gibraltar, as it was against Franco.
        1. K.O.S.
          K.O.S. April 27 2021 14: 37
          +1
          They could immediately land in Tunisia and Algeria (which is closer to Italy and with aviation cover), seize local airfields there and, under the cover of aviation, enter Morocco and block Gibraltar from there. Even more immediately after the surrender of France, the Italians offered Hitler to place their military bases there, but why Aloisevich refused is probably the main mystery of the Second World War, because the British fleet could not have done anything against aviation.
          1. Avior
            Avior April 27 2021 16: 41
            0
            Operation Felix and Isabella
            Planned invasion of Gibraltar from Spain
            Morocco was difficult to supply - the Allies had a sufficient fleet for this
            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Операция_«Феликс»
          2. yehat2
            yehat2 April 28 2021 09: 31
            -1
            with Gibraltar, the question is clear - Hitler got into politics and first turned Franco against himself, who did not allow Gibraltar to be easily recaptured, and then again a vague understanding of the importance of this point constantly prevented him from making all the conditions sufficient for a successful operation.
            For example, the Italian Navy donated fuel to the Eastern Front because they were not stocking up for operations in 41.
            If Hitler had more clearly understood the key significance of this point not in 41, but in 36, he would have been taken. There was enough strength for this.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA April 28 2021 11: 50
              +1
              Quote: yehat2
              with Gibraltar, the question is clear - Hitler got involved in politics and at first turned Franco against himself, who did not make it easy to recapture Gibraltar

              It was not politics that was the main thing, but the economy. Franco asked whether Germany would be able to replace the supply of agricultural products from America, which would cease after Spain went over to the side of the Reich. And he received the answer that no - the Reich no longer has enough food, even without Spain.
              After that, the negotiations could be considered meaningless - Franco only lacked food riots in Spain. smile
              1. yehat2
                yehat2 April 28 2021 12: 51
                -1
                Spain itself is an exporter of havchik, besides, they could be bought from Argentina or Turkey, they could in the south of Vichy France.
                No, the problem is different - they had graters during the civil war. Hitler in one moment did not help Franco, and after that he began to play in neutral.
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA April 28 2021 13: 07
                  +1
                  Quote: yehat2
                  Spain itself is an exporter of havchik

                  Three years after the Civil War? When Franco does not even control the entire territory of the country?
                  Spain in the early 40s is firmly on the overseas food needle. And negotiations for supplies were going on at the same time when Franco was negotiating with Hitler ..
                  Quote: yehat2
                  besides, they are quite ready to buy from Argentina

                  Is Argentina ready to quarrel with the United States for this? wink
                  And most importantly, who will pay? Grain supplies from the American continent went under US credit. smile
      2. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 April 27 2021 14: 51
        +2
        Because the war with the Anglo-Saxons was then more of a show for the public. All these "horrors", carefully collected by the author, like moss from a swamp, were not serious, but for the conclusion of peace in the desired configuration after the defeat of the USSR. And only when it became clear that the USSR would withstand, a REAL war began, in which the "allies" showed themselves to be complete zeros.
        Had Hitler not got into a fight with us, he would have devoured the British Empire like a pie. The submarines would then destroy the transit of US resources, the typical maritime economy, and the US, given the enormous size of the "fifth column" of ethnic Germans who openly admired Hitler, would also be knocked over. Hehe ...
        Another thing is that after that the USSR would have had no chance. Our army at the beginning of the War was too bad, and it was not a matter of technology. The question was in the training of officers, generals, and in industry too. Happy our God that everything turned out the way it turned out.
        1. K.O.S.
          K.O.S. April 27 2021 15: 24
          +1
          The fact that Hitler attacked the USSR did not finish off behind the Britons' back, it was of course his fatal mistake, like the abolition of the execution at the last moment. But after the defeat of France, a whole empire with huge colonial resources lay at his feet, while the Britons at that time after Dunkirk could not even defend their islands, all that remained was to finish off the wounded elephant - to block Gibraltar and all the British colonies up to India would quickly fall, and it is foolish to be in such a position to conclude peace with them (when it was possible to take everything at once). But alas, Hitler was drawn to the east where he broke off his teeth, and then everyone knows what happened
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 April 27 2021 16: 00
            +2
            Not sure about the error. More precisely ... Hitler understood the world that way. The USSR, in his concept, was to fall and collapse from a slight jolt. After that, thousands and thousands of the most modern enterprises seized by him in Europe and existing in Germany itself would acquire inexhaustible resources, as if by magic.
            The British Empire was strong as long as its navy was unrivaled. And a little pressed, and then she fell. What would Hitler get if they destroyed this empire? Decades of wars around the globe in the protection of communications. Any nonsense must be brought to the devil where it came from. Potentially, this is wealth, but a monstrous smut.
            In general, the mistake was in the huge underestimation of the USSR. A very strange underestimation. Find out who taught him and how? In general, this entire terrible War resembles a mass sacrifice performed by a person who is either under hypnosis or under another powerful influence. As if the goal was such - just to kill as many people as possible, and all the same for what.
            1. K.O.S.
              K.O.S. April 27 2021 19: 12
              +1
              Well, he had an example of the Finnish war before his eyes, this one, two times that before the attack on the USSR Germany had already fought for 1,5 years and, in fact, alone managed to defeat two of its most dangerous opponents, plus a bunch of smaller countries (including Poland, Denmark, Norway , Netherlands, Belgium, Yugoslavia, Greece) and all this in less than a year (!). But the attack on the USSR at that moment (without finishing off the Britons) was still a mistake, in order to understand why take a look at the map, especially on the line where the Germans were going to stop according to the Barbarossa plan - this is a huge territory from the Arctic Ocean (Arkhangelsk) to the Caucasus ( or Rostov as they originally planned), and think about how many troops had to be spent on this territory, and this despite the fact that the partisan war had already begun to gain momentum.
              1. Mikhail3
                Mikhail3 April 28 2021 12: 46
                +2
                I'm talking about the same thing. It was all unreal, impossible. He walked across the USSR on a wide front, and seriously hoped that he would be able to keep this strange line. Well, let's say a miracle happened. There is no industry behind the occupied territory. But there are still a lot of people there! There are ports in the Far East and roads, though not like in the European part, but there are. Let's say the "power of the Jews and the commissars" has fallen. So the Russians stayed anyway! Who have not yet forgiven anyone for their defeat. Plus the ability to pump up this line from Siberia with the Far East with weapons, equipment and troops.
                Did he really think that nobody would attack from there ?! I say - Hitler, who seized power in a country that was not the easiest for that, kept it, seized Europe, kicked a bunch of opponents on the nose, suddenly seemed to be blind and foolish. It's not casual, exactly. But what it was, I personally cannot guess.
                1. K.O.S.
                  K.O.S. April 28 2021 17: 52
                  +1
                  Well, maybe he hoped that Japan would help him, only to get involved in such an adventure without GUARANTEED support from them was still stupid.
          2. Avior
            Avior April 27 2021 16: 43
            0
            did not finish off the Britons behind

            because I couldn't
            had the desire, but did not have the opportunity
            no colonies would have fallen, by the way, why would they?
            1. K.O.S.
              K.O.S. April 27 2021 18: 42
              +1
              Opportunities were, if not even for Britain itself, then at least for Malta (at the beginning of 1941 it was an even easier target than Gibraltar). And about the colonies, if the Nazis got control over the Suez Canal, they would immediately go to Italian Somalia and Madagascar (where the Vishists settled), and from the other end, the Japanese captured Indonesia and Burma, as a result, all of India and Iran with the Middle East would be in a blockade and it is not necessary to take them ...
              1. Avior
                Avior April 27 2021 18: 56
                0
                Too much if
                With the entry of the States into the war and the decision on the Land Lisa, the British began to worry less about economic problems.
                It would be difficult for Anemians to be dispersed in such a space.
                Moreover, the allies moved the Vichy from the island
                1. K.O.S.
                  K.O.S. April 27 2021 19: 49
                  +1
                  The United States entered the war only in December 1941, but it is scattered from Arkhangelsk to Rostov / Caucasus when the United States is beating you in the back and the British Empire is somehow not good, and if the Germans had captured the Suez Canal, they would have killed four birds with one stone - they blocked the way for the Britons. oil from the Middle East, they themselves would have received oil, blockaded India, would have received a direct connection with the Japanese. And it was only necessary to hold on to Egypt, Malta and Madagascar as a last resort, the Italians would have helped.
                  1. Avior
                    Avior April 27 2021 21: 48
                    0
                    In reality, the States joined much earlier, even before they passed the Land Lisa law in the spring.
                    The possibilities of the Germans at sea were very limited, the campaign to Suez had to be started by land, from Turkey, and Turkey did not agree.
                    The Japanese had a lot of things to do, so far from their assistant, none of them - they did not help Madagascar
                    1. K.O.S.
                      K.O.S. April 27 2021 22: 23
                      +1
                      By land from Libya, it was much closer, but it was imperative to capture Malta, and about the naval forces in the Mediterranean, it was much more important to have a strong aviation than a fleet, and 1940 - 1941 had an ideal moment to defeat the British there. But if you really figure it out, the Germans still needed to land right in England itself in order to remove the huge line of the Atlantic coast from under the blow (and prevent the future accumulation of American troops there), since they had for this then not only their own, but also the French and Italian fleets plus Italian aviation would have helped in this, while the British aviation was exhausted.
                      1. Avior
                        Avior April 27 2021 22: 25
                        -1
                        The Germans lost the battle for England, their fleet was inferior to the English
                        The Unemians had no chance
                      2. K.O.S.
                        K.O.S. April 27 2021 22: 33
                        +1
                        So lost that after six months their aircraft bombed the USSR, and for the fleet you still need to remember for the Italians and the French, whose ships they could use.
                      3. Avior
                        Avior April 27 2021 22: 53
                        +1
                        They lost the battle for England in the air, the English fleet could not neutralize
                        The Italians and the remnants of the French fleet could hardly help them.
                      4. K.O.S.
                        K.O.S. April 27 2021 23: 07
                        +1
                        Yes, I admit they lost, but alas, Britain alone would not have survived against the whole of occupied Europe, if the Germans had set up aircraft production at least in France and in the spring of 1941 they could have tried again, plus during the battle for England the British themselves lost more pilots than the Germans and to train the pilot is not so easy.
                      5. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA April 28 2021 12: 54
                        +1
                        Quote: K.O.S.
                        Yes, I admit they lost, but alas, Britain alone would not have survived against the entire occupied Europe, if the Germans had set up aircraft production at least in France and in the spring of 1941 they could have tried again

                        In the spring of 1941, no Britain alone was gone. By this time, the United States stood behind Britain, actively pumping up the ally with weapons, equipment and resources. EMNIP, when the United States, after entering the war, confiscated British orders for four-engine bombers, the fleet of these machines in the USAAF doubled.
                        Moreover, in the spring of 1941, US Army quarters had already landed on the Islands to study the future bases of the US Army and Air Force.
                      6. K.O.S.
                        K.O.S. April 28 2021 17: 01
                        +1
                        Yes, the United States was a saving straw for Britain, but in order to transfer troops / equipment to Britain, it was necessary to cross the Atlantic Ocean teeming with submarines and time. Secondly, you need to remember that the United States in 1941 was militarily "weak", to put it mildly, and to deploy a combat-ready army and saturate it with weapons, time was needed again, but the Britons did not have it (choose the Germans for the second attempt to storm the islands).
                      7. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA April 28 2021 18: 08
                        0
                        Quote: K.O.S.
                        Yes, the United States was a saving straw for Britain, but in order to transfer troops / equipment to Britain, it was necessary to cross the Atlantic Ocean teeming with submarines and time.

                        The United States has been doing all this since 1940. And security in the Atlantic was provided by the Neutral Patrol, whose area of ​​responsibility was shifted to the east (thus provoking the Reich).
                        As for the technical side of the issue, in 1941 the United States has smooth decks, multipurpose TPs and 173-foot patrolmen. And for Britain, escort ABs are being built. Plus Britain has "Khanty" and "Flowers". So to cover the KOH with weapons and equipment, strength can be found.
                        Quote: K.O.S.
                        Secondly, you need to remember that the United States in 1941 was militarily "weak", to put it mildly, and in order to deploy a combat-ready army and saturate it with weapons, it was necessary again time

                        The United States is helping the Navy and Air Force. And arm the British army.
                      8. K.O.S.
                        K.O.S. April 28 2021 18: 29
                        +1
                        In words it is menacing, but in practice the Anglo-Saxons have learned how to fight off the underwater threat only since the summer of 1943, and before that the Germans beat their convoys as they wanted. Read about the underwater aces of the Reich - they all received their crosses during this period in 1941-1942.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 April 28 2021 13: 16
    0
    Quote: K.O.S.
    The fact that Hitler attacked the USSR did not finish off behind the Britons, it was certainly his fatal mistake

    firstly, the sinking of the English direction began at Dunkirk.
    If the Germans had eliminated the bridgehead, then England for the next half-year would have no one except the militia. And then, without the officers, the army would have been none.
    Churchill really feared that there would be no one to defend the island.
    Do not forget that fascism is just a form of capitalism and the British and Germans were noticeably sympathetic to each other. For example, the British openly poured Czechoslovakia into the Germans. Hitler seriously hoped to conclude an honorable alliance with England.
    So the logical chain of errors started much earlier.
    1. K.O.S.
      K.O.S. April 28 2021 17: 17
      +1
      Yes, he hoped to make peace, even sent his man to London, but alas, the Britons meanly refused him. And about Czechoslovakia, you are a little mistaken here - the British sent a note to the French before Munich, they say, you can not merge Czechoslovakia and in case of war promised to support them, but alas, the French said no, so the French were the first to merge Czechoslovakia.
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 April 28 2021 17: 26
        +1
        I hear this version for the first time. After Munich, Chamberlain went out into the street to wave a piece of paper of the contract and brag.
        1. K.O.S.
          K.O.S. April 28 2021 17: 36
          +1
          Well, what else could he do, by the way, the piece of paper which he was waving was some kind of another agreement. In general, on Varspot and Varkhab, they once sorted out this "deal with the devil", you need to look for these articles
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 28 2021 18: 49
          +1
          Quote: yehat2
          I hear this version for the first time. After Munich, Chamberlain went out into the street to wave a piece of paper of the contract and brag.

          Still, he would not be happy - he won another year for Britain to rebuild the armed forces.
          This "peacemaker" increased the military budget six times, but even such infusions could not compensate for the time lost in the first half of the 30s. So Munich was to Britain what the Pact was to us.
          In general, the first half of the war, Britain fought with Chamberlain's orders. And the navy almost the entire war. smile
          1. yehat2
            yehat2 April 29 2021 09: 29
            0
            all the Britons needed was to support the French in the Ruhr in time, or help the USSR defend Czechoslovakia, or at least sign an alliance treaty with the SSR. but for some reason, it turned out the other way around and arrogantly simply averted during the Polish campaign, helped to double military production at the expense of Czechoslovakia and equip the Wehrmacht with almost a thousand Pz 35 (t) and 38 (t) tanks.
            No, they did not create any impudent respite. They stupidly kindled the war and thought that they would be carried over.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA April 29 2021 11: 07
              +1
              Quote: yehat2
              all the Britons needed was to support the French in the Ruhr in time, or help the USSR defend Czechoslovakia, or at least sign an alliance treaty with the SSR. but for some reason, it turned out the other way around and arrogantly simply averted during the Polish campaign, helped to double military production at the expense of Czechoslovakia and equip the Wehrmacht with almost a thousand Pz 35 (t) and 38 (t) tanks.

              And Britain had nothing to support the French. Thanks to the wise and perspicacious policy of Mr. Churchill, Britain by the mid-30s had virtually no army or air force. And if the Germans resist, the French demand to back up their words with deeds, then it will become clear that the king is naked.
              Can you imagine to what state it was necessary to bring the army so that in 1935 the Minister of Finance (who was exactly Chamberlain) demanded an increase in the military budget? The person assigned to keep track of the expenses demanded that these expenses be increased! smile

              The second reason for Britain's non-intervention is internal. To stay in power, the Conservatives had to take public opinion into account. And it tended to non-interference. If the Conservatives began to act sharply, then with a high degree of probability they would receive a political crisis, the resignation of the government and a new election, which would be won by Labor.
              It must be said in all frankness that neither public opinion nor the Labor Party will support military or even economic sanctions against Germany at the present time. Public opinion clearly distinguishes between the actions of Señor Mussolini in waging an aggressive war outside his borders and the real actions of Herr Hitler, which are more than worthy of narrowing, but still carried out by him within the "German Reich".
              © H. Dalton, Labor leader in Parliament. 26.03.1936/XNUMX/XNUMX
              Chamberlain himself was accused by the Laborites of
              ... Mr Chamberlain is willing to spend millions on weapons of destruction. However, he has no money for the unemployed, depressed areas, and social security. He is more likely to spend on the means of killing than on the means of life, he even looks like death.
              © G. Morrison, second man in the Labor Party, 03.11.1935
              Years pass, but the rhetoric does not change. smile
              1. yehat2
                yehat2 April 29 2021 13: 20
                +2
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Thanks to the wise and perspicacious policy of Mr. Churchill, Britain by the mid-30s had virtually no army or air force.

                you probably made a slip. Churchill had no such influence in the 30s.
                He mainly oversaw the admiralty and some special operations.
              2. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA April 29 2021 18: 43
                0
                Quote: yehat2
                you probably made a slip. Churchill had no such influence in the 30s.
                He mainly oversaw the admiralty and some special operations.

                He managed to podkuzmit while still the Chancellor of the Treasury. In those days, he proclaimed the principle "we build an army and a navy on the assumption that we have 10 years without a war", which was picked up by his" replacements. "As a result, in the mid-30s the Empire did not have an army and air force. Even the naval budget was cut so much that an attempt to cut costs a little by reducing salaries turned into the Invergordon mutiny.
              3. yehat2
                yehat2 April 30 2021 09: 48
                +1
                Well, the reduction of the Air Force even before Chmberlain and Churchill happened.
                But the poor progress in tanks is directly related to Churchill.
                His merit is the almost complete absence of the PTO before the start of the war.
          2. K.O.S.
            K.O.S. April 29 2021 16: 57
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            the French will demand to back up their words with deeds, then it turns out that the king is naked.

            For the sake of justice, it must be said that the French, too, did not shine, especially after Monsieur Daladier squandered the gold reserve, and they took up their army only after 1936, and then through their sleeves - at least remember that they could not remember for 4 years provide your tanks with radio communication!
        3. K.O.S.
          K.O.S. April 29 2021 16: 43
          +1
          The USSR could not defend Czechoslovakia in any way, because the Poles there rested their horns and refused to let our troops through their territory. And regarding the union with the USSR, they flew to us only after they pissed off Czechoslovakia, but alas, at the same time the Germans flew to Moscow who promised Stalin Western Ukraine along with Belarus - and Stalin made a choice in favor of the Germans.
          By the way, an interesting fact: when the German delegation flew to Moscow, their plane was accidentally fired upon by our anti-aircraft gunners, and it is not known how history would have gone if they had been shot down.
  • andrew42
    andrew42 4 May 2021 12: 08
    0
    "and being in such a position is foolish to make peace with them." - So this is not peace, but a normal agreement. And not between Hitler & the Bonzes and the Churchill & Lords, but a deeper level, a higher real status. Figuratively speaking, the task has been updated something like "Okay, Adolf. During the European get-together, you proved that you are capable of mobilizing both the Germans and practically the whole of Western Europe. You have earned the status of a battering ram against Russia and against communism. Now you are well equipped, prepared. So that's enough, The Sabbath is a nightmare for Britain. We need this platform. Quickly turned around, and march-march, nah Austen. We will not hit in the back on takeoff. " Something like this. And Goebbels squealed, and Adik turned his head to the east, and the generals took their heads with their hands, - "Barbarossa" to develop. As a result, the non-pre-Aryans declared themselves "exclusive Aryans" and attacked essentially the Aryan peoples, and seriously thinned the "livestock" on both sides of the Oder.
  • Petrik66
    Petrik66 April 27 2021 15: 36
    +2
    German scientists, listening to live broadcasts of the ringing of Big Ben before the BBC news, learned to determine the weather, but the Brits got wind of this and began broadcasting the ringing of bells in the recording, which put the German air force in full non-readiness. This is from English stories about the war. And also patriotic English women, instead of stockings, began to draw on their legs with pencils - a seam from stockings.
    1. Avior
      Avior April 27 2021 17: 12
      +1
      In the 1940s, due to a wartime shortage, stockings were in short supply. Silk and nylon were used for military purposes, they did not want to wear cotton, and for the fact that without stockings, the police could fine - for indecent behavior. Instead of stockings, so-called "liquid stockings" were applied to the legs, and a line was drawn in the back with a pencil, imitating a seam.
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 28 2021 11: 43
    +1
    Quote: K.O.S.
    The Germans could crush the Britons already in 1940, and they did not even have to land on the islands - it was enough to send troops to Morocco and block Gibraltar from there, a month later all the British troops in Egypt and Malta bent down

    What is the point of blocking Gibraltar if practically no one walks through Mediterranean? While Italy fought on the Axis side, supplies to Egypt went around Africa.
    1. yehat2
      yehat2 April 28 2021 13: 05
      +2
      if Gibraltar were blocked off, the Axis powers would be able to build a defensive perimeter and concentrate forces in the image of Japan. In addition, tranquility in North Africa would make it possible to occupy the Middle East and extract oil and other resources.
      A detour around Africa would make a huge operational gap between the forces of the fleet and would sharply worsen the position of both the fleet and the protection of transports.
      The balance of power in the west would change dramatically. In addition, it is possible that part of the French surface fleet would be at the disposal of Germany. And it would have been a completely different alignment, like in WWI.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 28 2021 14: 04
        +1
        Quote: yehat2
        if Gibraltar were blocked off, the Axis countries would be able to build a defensive perimeter and concentrate forces in the image of Japan.

        Then you need to take Egypt with Suez. Which do not depend on Gibraltar in any way.
        Quote: yehat2
        A detour around Africa would make a huge operational gap between the forces of the fleet and would sharply worsen the position of both the fleet and the protection of transports.

        In real life, a detour around Africa lasted until the surrender of Italy. And nothing - Britain somehow coped.
        Moreover, the lengthening of the communications of the Allies was compensated by a decrease in the forces of the enemy fleet, which he could influence these communications. In Mediterranean on cowed even torpedo boats stuffed. smile
        Quote: yehat2
        In addition, it is possible that part of the French surface fleet would be at the disposal of Germany.

        That would be incredibly happy for the fleet, industry and the rear. Alien calibers, alien mechanisms, alien systems ... the entire chain of French naval suppliers will have to be restored.
        1. yehat2
          yehat2 April 28 2021 14: 09
          +1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Then you need to take Egypt with Suez. Which do not depend on Gibraltar in any way.

          What for? The mere fact that the movement will go through the cape is already a serious change. After all, this is an extension of the path for at least 3 weeks.
          Besides, without Gibraltar, Malta is already doomed.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA April 29 2021 11: 47
            +1
            Quote: yehat2
            What for? The mere fact that the movement will go through the cape is already a serious change. After all, this is an extension of the path for at least 3 weeks.

            There is no change with the real. Because in real life, Mediterranean was already closed to the passage of British ships from the moment Italy entered the war.
            Since the middle of 1940, all traffic has been going through Cape Horn. Only convoys to Malta go through Mediterranean.
            Quote: yehat2
            Besides, without Gibraltar, Malta is already doomed.

            Without Gibraltar, Malta is only doomed if the LK is knocked out of Cunningham. Otherwise, KON will go to Malta as in real life - from Alexandria.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA April 29 2021 18: 45
              0
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Since the middle of 1940, all traffic has been going through Cape Horn.

              Sorry, around Cape Agulhas. Cape Horn is in the Pacific Ocean.
  • squid
    squid April 27 2021 13: 27
    -3
    The idea "the strategic position is excellent, but it does not work out at the front" looks colorful.
    But on the whole there is a grain of truth. And only one question grows from this grain - how did the communists manage to concede half of the European part of the country with 40% of the population, in this situation? Well this is how it was necessary to "lead" for such a result ...
    1. Olezhek
      April 27 2021 21: 36
      +1
      The idea "the strategic position is excellent, but it does not work out at the front" looks colorful.


      well ... the thought doesn't seem too complicated. request
      1. ee2100
        ee2100 April 27 2021 22: 01
        +2
        I liked the view from Berlin. Maybe not jingoistic, but your opinion has the right to life.
        And if you look from Berlin, then many things are seen differently
      2. Cowbra
        Cowbra April 28 2021 02: 50
        -1
        Quote: Olezhek
        the thought does not seem too complicated.

        No, not complicated. And in general, the idea itself is curious. But a number of real waters, not even assumptions, but mistakes, are neutralized. You write over there "in the 43rd in Germany, the famine begins." Yeah? !!! You do not know how else in Brest the Germans exchanged cigarettes and rations with the Red Army soldiers. the same stew - for ammunition? About the fact that in the 41st in the reports of the commanders of the units - the first line went how much bread and pigs were captured, and then about whom they won, whom did they lose? In the end, "grandma, trigger, milk-eggs" - news to you? !!! Yes, they climbed into the USSR - there is nothing to eat! Cannons instead of butter! Strange, isn't it? You have managed to lose this fact - and a number of others.
        I recommend that you just think, by the way, what they wrote to you here on the branch - read it, although, I see, you did so ... And write on this topic again. The topic is interesting, and you covered it well, but - not without flaws
      3. Cowbra
        Cowbra April 28 2021 03: 06
        -1
        Yes, and more, the author ... So, I give a rough outline - https://afirsov.livejournal.com/tag/BOV
        The author of TV and A&K, here throws off, for example, his amused excerpts from the now digitized archive of TsAMO. For example, about the real slovenliness of the German troops in the field of discipline and, to put it mildly, the exaggerated quality of German technology. It is also funny to read, eyes on the forehead climb precisely from, for example, the same "Schumachers". This is also a topic for you. why not?
    2. yehat2
      yehat2 April 29 2021 13: 42
      +2
      Quote: squid
      the communists managed to concede half of the European part of the country with 40% of the population

      I'll just remind you the statistics. on June 22, 41, the party had only half a million people.
      They physically could not solve everything. This is not EDRo for you. In addition, it was only by the year 39 that the KPB was able to complete the period of "factions" and became more or less unified in its program and administration. This is about your passages about the communists.
      Quote: squid
      how in general

      Now about the history. What is the Reich in the fall of 39 before the attack on Poland?
      It is funny in terms of the composition and size of the Air Force and the Wehrmacht. The attack involved less than 90 T3 and T4 tanks, mainly T1 and T2, which are more like tankettes. Aviation is also so to itself - a significant part - pieces and a bunch of biplanes He-51 and Fiat-42.
      And now let's compare the Reich in just a year and a half - the army with allies on the border of the USSR - about 8.7 million people (and only 11.5), about 900 Czech tanks joined the Wehrmacht, a bunch of mechanized trophies were captured in France, 20 new infantry divisions were formed on the trophies of France, 7 connections are fully mechanized. The Wehrmacht received more than 25 thousand trucks and a bunch of other junk. Germany has acquired fat strategic reserves, and its aviation fleet has been seriously renewed. Germany solved the synthetic fuel problem thanks to the United States, Hungary provided aviation with high-octane fuel. Etc. The French replaced in Germany in the production of 3 million conscripts who joined the Wehrmacht.
      The Soviet Union simply did not have time to respond to such a huge increase. Stalin's government was preparing, but they hoped that such an increase would take place no earlier than 42 years. If the defeat of Poland could be predicted, then the easy defeat of France could not.
      And so the Union turned out to be strategically unprepared for a 41-year war. We were also lucky that Mussolini embarked on an adventure in Greece and this distracted Germany a little in the spring.

      Do you understand how?
  • Cowbra
    Cowbra April 28 2021 02: 37
    +1
    After that, the general strategic situation for the Germans became absolutely hopeless.

    Provided that the Soviet front does not fall apart.

    Yeah. Yes Yes. Only Hitler climbed to the Union in the certainty that the Soviet front would collapse, and the plans were - the occupation somewhere up to the Urals, inclusive. And this strategically solves the problem of resources - and the Americans and the British can at least block themselves at sea - for Germany this is as scary as for Russia - the sanctions of Lithuania. The bases at the end of 41 -
    * At the front, everything is as planned. Leningrad has not yet been taken, but it looks like a couple of inconspicuous trifles, a hole near Moscow. There, after all, the breakthrough of the tanks was not miraculously overslept - in fact, by accident, reconnaissance opened it. To finish off, they say, Stalin with all the main things - to hang, and everything that is not finished off - will run away into holes by itself. Looks like that.
    * A professional army with enormous combat experience over and over again cuts the defenses of some militias. And it is the army men themselves who will always tell what a grease for a bayonet is - and the same military Hitler treated him in the same way.
    * Human resources in Germany? And why in Germany only, more Frenchmen died in Russia with weapons than in the war in France? If you counted Germany alone - why don't you compare the resources of the Moscow principality with them - the country expanded from it. So then only the Moscow region will be at war with Germany, the rest are growing bamboo to smoke?
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion April 28 2021 09: 19
    +1
    And what is the actual discovery? That Germany wanted to move more powerful competitors, primarily the Britts, but could not do this, having suffered several major defeats on the Soviet front, after which the balance of forces became very much not in favor of the Germans?

    At the same time, one moment is forgotten that this whole wonderful situation, when the whole world in one way or another helps the Union to beat the Germans, was achieved by the diplomatic successes of the USSR before the war.

    Reasoning about the coastline only works with a lack of resources, since the capabilities of attackers from the sea are greatly limited by the capabilities of the fleet or aviation, and another question is whether Britain could have bombed Germany in the same way if the Germans had not had an eastern front. At the same time, Hitler cannot be called stupid in this regard, the Germans highly estimated the chances of success for "Barbarossa", and on the Soviet side any additional major miscalculation could lead to defeat both in 41 and 42 years. And even at Kursk, the military victory of the USSR in the summer campaign before the start of the Citadel was not obvious. Another question is that for the Germans it was already really an alyn, which, if successful, would only level up the situation.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 April 28 2021 12: 57
    +2
    wasted article, there are so many jambs that there is simply no point in counting
    1. Olezhek
      April 29 2021 07: 06
      +2
      Write a rebuttal, expose me.
      And let me be ashamed.
      Let be.
      hi
      But I won't cry.
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 April 29 2021 09: 23
        +1
        I have already written one point at a time.
        just too lazy to describe everything.
        study better yourself, so as not to post such a disgrace
  • Barmal
    Barmal April 28 2021 16: 52
    0
    I will cry schaz when I read an article about the military exploits of Britain and the United States with stew and aluminum after (!) Stalingrad and rushes to get into my eyes with my pity for the unfortunate Hitler, his army and the armies of his satellites from Europe, so shamelessly offended by Stalin, the Red Army / SA and the Soviet Navy, that even cry.
    1. Olezhek
      April 29 2021 08: 49
      0
      I will pay


      Do not. You will not wash the display later.
      1. Barmal
        Barmal April 29 2021 23: 02
        +1
        watch your shells, Olezhek
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov April 29 2021 11: 34
    +1
    That is, just the Red Army for the summer campaign of 42 could have very different options, the Germans could not have them - only a decisive offensive! Otherwise, death.

    The Germans always beat the option of not starting a war in the East in 1941 and then ending it in 1942 or until Teheran in 1943, avoiding unconditional surrender and on the conditions of the USSR.
    The conditions of the children could be very unpleasant for Germany, including reparations, but still incomparably better than the unconditional surrender in 1945.
    Consequently, in 41st, 42nd and 43rd, the only acceptable option for the Wehrmacht in Russia is a decisive offensive at any cost in order to defeat the Red Army (the strategic position of the Wehrmacht is desperate from the very beginning of the campaign in Russia). On this they could be "caught". Unfortunately, they did not catch it.

    They were "caught" on this in the summer of 41, when they did not start a "preventive" offensive. The Red Army defended itself strategically for the entire period. Defense does not mean not conducting a counteroffensive.
    Shouldn't you attack near Moscow or Stalingrad?
    But there was a "battle for the Atlantic" that required a lot of German resources. And there was a constant war in the air over Germany, which devoured a significant part of the forces of the Luftwaffe and the products of the German military-industrial complex.

    1. For the war at sea, including the war at sea in the East, it took no more than 5-6 percent of Germany's military expenditures, although they can be reduced by two or three times. A complete rejection of the construction of submarines could not change the outcome on land.
    2. The effect of aviation, including the Luftwaffe, on a war on land is also small - no more than a few percent of all losses on the ground. This was confirmed later by the war in Korea, where the US aviation had absolute superiority over the battlefield, but this did not help decisively weaken the enemy and play the war. The Americans themselves finally noticed this and began to talk about how to play a war with the superiority of air power.
    3. The German military-industrial complex produced all the necessary weapons about ammunition for the war on land at least until the end of 1944. They lacked people, trained soldiers and officers with combat experience for the land army, which they had already lost in the East. By the end of 1944, problems began with fuel for aviation, but it was already suppressed in the air and it was impossible to expect anything from it. At the same time, the loss of Rumunia was more important for the Reich than the bombing of factories for synthetic fuel. Germany did not have a shortage of weapons almost to the end and she could wage war at sea and in the air for as long as she wanted, if she did not lose the war on land.
  • Cheerock
    Cheerock April 29 2021 21: 12
    +1
    So, Britain (empire!) Is then stronger and richer than Germany. Oddly enough.

    The author should read Eisenhower's memoirs, for example. It describes in detail how much Britain was stronger and richer than "Germany", which, in fact, was at that time an analogue of the modern EU. And in the same place it is perfectly described what Britain could do without the help of the United States. Nothing, in general.
  • wow
    wow 2 May 2021 08: 53
    +2
    There was this invasion of "twelve languages", as he wrote about the war with Napoleon A.S. Pushkin. And in 1812 and 1941-45, we had to crush the forces of a "united" Europe, and not just the French or only the Germans. These were the armies of the then EU led by Napoleon and Hitler. So the "author" licked the causal place for the Anglo-Saxons. It's great to join the fight when the enemy has already shattered the back!
  • adler87
    adler87 16 May 2021 20: 28
    0
    Nicely written. Thank you.