Military Review

Why Stalin did not believe in Hitler's attack in the summer of 1941

281
Why Stalin did not believe in Hitler's attack in the summer of 1941
German soldiers crossing the state border of the USSR


The successes of the German blitzkrieg


Hitler viewed the USSR's armed forces as poorly organized eastern hordes that could be easily dispersed, dissected, surrounded and destroyed. He was partly right. If in material terms the Soviet Union achieved tremendous success, then in the moral and psychological sphere it was an unstable system in a dangerous period of development. The transformation of Russia has just begun, and Soviet civilization could have been knocked out on takeoff.

Therefore, the Germans tried to destroy the USSR with a blitzkrieg, which was accompanied by a powerful psychological impact on the Soviet people. The Nazis have already successfully tested this strategy in Poland, France and Yugoslavia. The Germans have done a lot for this. They refused total mobilization, but they prepared much better for an attack on Russia than for the Polish or French campaigns.

As a result, we have achieved overwhelming success:

1. We were able to misinform the Kremlin: when the troops were concentrated in the east, the impression was created that the Germans were not ready for war. That they are afraid of an attack by the USSR and are strengthening the defense on the eastern flank.

Indeed, they were not prepared for a long war. Only to a swift offensive campaign, a series of crushing blows from which the enemy must collapse. Then an easy walk, the occupation of important areas and points, agreements with new regimes in the vastness of the collapsed Union. The Germans were preparing not for the classic war of the industrial powers, but for a war to defeat the consciousness of the enemy, for a grandiose subversive operation, the explosion of the USSR from within.

2. Skillful actions of special forces and German agents created hotbeds of chaos and panic in the border areas.

3. They used their new tactics of the air force at full power, showing the wonders of organizing strikes, centralized use aviation, the precise destruction of key points of the Russian defense, the use of communications and guidance from the ground. The Soviet Air Force was virtually defeated, often on the ground. The bombers were left without fighter cover and died in masses. The bombings of Minsk, Kiev and other cities were in the nature of psychological, demoralizing blows. They led to a panic that gripped millions of people.

4. The Germans were able to fully use the effect of surprise, lightning war and a new weapons... They threw into the breakout perfectly organized tank and motorized divisions. German mobile units were inferior to the Soviet ones in the number of tanks, but they were far ahead of them in terms of organization and thoughtfulness of weapons and equipment. Plus skillful interaction with artillery and aviation. The Germans did not bind themselves to the capture of strongholds and nodes of resistance. The Nazis, meeting stubborn defenses, bypassed such areas, easily found weak spots in the enemy's battle formations (it was impossible to cover everything) and rushed forward. The appearance of German tanks in the rear often caused panic, disorder in the "raw" Soviet divisions, and the general defense collapsed. The Nazis went further, did not stop to consolidate the result.

Thanks to this, the Nazis literally crushed the USSR cadre army in the west of the country, staging a mind-boggling military catastrophe in Belarus and Ukraine. They swiftly captured the Baltic States with its ports, paralyzed the Soviet Baltic Fleet. Locked large surface ships and submarines in the narrow Gulf of Finland, dooming them to capture when the German and Finnish divisions take Leningrad. As a result, Berlin secured its communications in the Baltic, through which the Reich received metals from Scandinavia. Success in the southern direction removed the threat of strikes on oil fields in Romania and Hungary. In the wake of the first successes, German divisions broke through to Leningrad, the second capital of the USSR, captured Kiev and ended up at Moscow. In the south, they broke through to the Crimea.

What was wrong with the Fuhrer


The main blunder of Hitler and his entourage is the assessment of the Soviet elite.

She was judged by the example of the Civil War and the 20s. When among the Bolsheviks there were several major leaders, factions, parties, groups. There was a tough struggle for power. Intrigues, quarrels, elimination of the unwanted. But in 1941 everything was different.

The leader was alone. A steel man who went through exile, the Civil War, the fight against the Trotskyists and other "deviations". This was not a typical Western democratic politician who, at the first threat, falls into a stupor and hysteria. Contrary to the myth that was spread during the years of "perestroika" and the democratic "victory" of the 90s, Stalin did not panic and fled the Kremlin in the first days of the war. He retained control of the situation and from the first day of the Great War worked hard to repel the Nazi invasion, overcoming monstrous defeats. The leader's steel will bore fruit.

The General Staff, government, party and military command worked. Commanders and Red Army men fought to the death. In the occupied cities and regions, pockets of resistance immediately arose, underground fighters and partisans, ready to die for the sake of a lofty idea.

There was no internal explosion either (Why Stalin destroyed the revolutionary elite). Before the war, Stalin and his associates neutralized most of the "fifth column". The remnants of the Trotskyist internationalists went underground, hiding under the guise of devoted Stalinists. Therefore, there were no military revolts, possible Bonapartes were cleaned out.

It is also worth noting that the Germans had to deal with a different society than in the West.

There was no freedom of speech and mass media in the USSR, which the Germans used to spread terror and panic in Western Europe. The Western press and radio were of great help to Hitler and his generals. They turned one or two paratroopers (or there were none at all) into whole airborne divisions, the actions of a few border agents into a powerful "fifth column" of traitors. We found German tanks where there weren't any, etc. As a result, the people turned into a running herd, armies into disorganized crowds. And the authorities, with their hasty, inept actions, only worsened the situation, they themselves broke the control system.

In the USSR, they knew how to deal with alarmists. The radio receivers were seized, which made it possible to avoid the enemy's informational influence on the minds of Soviet citizens. There was no TV or Internet then, and newspapers, newsreels and radio were completely under the control of the Soviet government. The Germans were left with only leaflets and the spread of rumors. But this could be stopped. Thus, panic and hysteria were avoided throughout the country.

Stalin demonstrated the will to fight to the end. The people felt it. And the Germans from the very beginning felt the fierce resistance of the Russians, which did not weaken, but intensified. It was about the steel will of the Soviet leader that the German blitzkrieg broke.

Stalin prepared the country and society for a big war. The people were preparing for labor and defense, for the worst turn of events. The country was saved by the fact that in the 30s, despite all the economic benefits, a new industrial base was created in the east. Developed a new industrial base in the Urals and Siberia. The Ural and Siberian ores were of inferior quality than those in the Donbass. Production in the east was more expensive than in the west of the country. But he was persistently raised. The second oil industrial base was developed between the Volga and the Urals. Created by the Magnitogorsk and Kuznetsk metallurgical giants. In the Far East, Komsomolsk-on-Amur, an aviation and shipbuilding center, was raised. All over the country, backup plants for mechanical engineering, metallurgy, oil refining, chemistry, etc. were created. At the same time, they had to work independently, if possible, at the local raw material base. During the war, when the southern and northwestern industrial regions were lost and the central region was under attack, the Urals saved the entire country.

Before the war, the emphasis was on the development of the regions. In each region, industries are being created that must satisfy its basic needs for fuel, building materials, energy, food, etc. Livestock and vegetable bases are being created around large cities. Gardening is developing. Stalin creates strategic reserves, insures the country against the worst scenarios. And this saved the country in 1941, when we lost the entire western part of Russia!

Why did the war become "unexpected"


The Nazis were able to organize an unexpected strike. They managed to present the pulling together of their forces to the East as a deceit, disinformation. Hitler managed to wage a successful information and psychological war, giving Moscow the impression that he was not going to strike first. This allowed the Wehrmacht to take full advantage of the surprise effect and sweep away the battle formations of the Red Army on the western border (especially in Belarus).

During the years of glasnost, perestroika and the formation of the Russian Federation, the myth of Stalin's "gullibility" was created. They say that the Soviet leader, because of his stupidity and stubbornness, did not heed the numerous warnings about the impending aggression of the Third Reich. Stalin did not believe his intelligence officers, various well-wishers of the USSR and reports from England. Therefore, I am to blame for all the troubles and failures of the USSR. Plus Beria, who played along with the owner and sent everyone who came with bad news to the Gulag.

However, pretty soon serious military research appeared, which smashed this version to smithereens. Stalin was not a gullible fool. He possessed a gifted mind, an iron will and developed intuition, otherwise he would not have become the leader of the USSR-Russia in a critical era. There were a lot of reports, the dates were different. It was obvious that England wanted to confront the Russians and the Germans again, as in 1914. Therefore, the "warnings" from London were more like misinformation. Stalin really did not want the Russians to fight again for British interests.

It is also worth remembering that Hitler and Stalin were different types of leaders. Stalin is an iron logician, a rationalist. Hitler relied more on intuition, his insights. The Soviet leader knew that Germany was not ready for a classic war of attrition. Intelligence worked well: Moscow knew that Germany had not carried out a total mobilization. The Germans have small reserves of strategic raw materials. The army is not ready for the winter campaign: there is no winter uniform, frost-resistant lubricant for equipment and weapons.

Second front factor


The Kremlin knew that the German generals most of all fear a war on two fronts, which destroyed Germany in the First World War. The Reich had an unfinished England in the west, which had already recovered and strengthened its military capabilities. There were hostilities in North Africa, it is possible that the Germans, after Greece and Crete, will land troops in the Middle East. Or they will storm Malta, and then Egypt. It was all logical and reasonable.

Thus, it was reasonable that Germany would not go to war with Russia until the problem of England was solved. And even without mobilizing the economy. The deployment of German divisions on the border with the USSR could be easily explained. Berlin could have feared a surprise blow from the Russians while they dealt with England. It is logical to prepare a powerful barrier in the East, since the Fuhrer has enough troops now. The Cretan operation acted as a rehearsal for a larger operation to seize the British Isles.

Stalin knew that the British Empire was in a very dangerous position. Hitler could throw the main forces of the Air Force and the Navy against England, increase the production of submarines, disrupt the enemy's sea communications. Really prepare an amphibious operation in England, linking up all the land, air and sea forces of the enemy. Capture Malta together with the Italians. Put pressure on Franco and take Gibraltar. Landing troops in Syria and Lebanon. Strengthen Rommel's grouping in Libya and crush British forces in Egypt with two counter strikes. Then rebuild a friendly regime in Iraq. Drag Turkey to your side, etc. In general, if Hitler wanted a real victory over England, he could well have done it.

The only hope of the British for salvation was the clash between the Russians and the Germans. Stalin remembered very well how France and England saved their empires in 1914-1917, fighting the Second Reich "to the last Russian soldier." And even earlier, Britain could use Tsarist Russia to crush Napoleon's empire. In both cases, the British, with the help of misinformation, deception, bribery, intrigue, loans and a palace coup (the assassination of Tsar Paul), thwarted attempts at rapprochement and alliance of Russia with France and with imperial Germany. Thus, the British saved their world empire. It is obvious that the British did not betray their political principles in the late 30s and early 40s. Together with the French, they tried with all their might to send the Third Reich to the East. True, Hitler first decided to settle the French question.

After the defeat of France, the secret policy of England remained unchanged. The British tried to play off the Russians and the Germans. Therefore, the secret reports of the British about the impending German attack on the USSR were very much like disinformation. For Stalin to succumb to the provocation and hit Germany first.

With these facts before his eyes, the rationalist Stalin did not believe in Hitler's attack in the spring and summer of 1941. For all the logical reasons, this could not happen. The war was expected around 1942, when Hitler would solve the problem of the second front.

The problem was that the Fuhrer was not a rationalist, his thinking was not analytical, but intuitive. Hitler rushed into battle without bringing the country and the economy to a state of full readiness, without sufficient reserves of raw materials, and without even preparing the army for the winter campaign.

True, he had a secret agreement with London that there would be no real second front. Hitler knew that while he was smashing Russia, England and the United States would not interfere.

In addition, there is information that it was not possible to completely suppress the "fifth column" in the Red Army. Moscow, just before the start of the war, brought the armed forces to full combat readiness. But some generals sabotaged this directive. Therefore, the troops of the NKVD and the fleet were ready for an enemy attack, but the units of the Red Army in Belarus were not.

Hence the catastrophe in the central strategic direction, which did not exist at the very beginning of the war in Ukraine.
Author:
Photos used:
http://waralbum.ru/
281 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. SERGE ANT
    SERGE ANT 10 June 2021 04: 12
    +39
    The main blunder of Hitler and his entourage is the assessment of the Soviet elite.
    The main blunder of Hitler and his entourage is the underestimation of the Soviet people.
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 10 June 2021 04: 26
      +22
      Stalin prepared the country and society for a big war. The people prepared for labor and defense
      And what songs were: "Get up, huge country, get up to mortal combat" ...
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 10 June 2021 04: 42
        +22
        You can talk for a long time about bad personnel in the Red Army, the fifth column, the effect of surprise, and so on. But the main (in my opinion) reason for the defeats at the beginning of the war was different. The Red Army was inferior to the Wehrmacht in the main: The Red Army hopelessly lost to the Germans by the number of troops simultaneously entering the battle... That is, the German machine, fine-tuned for two years of the war, primitively smashed the "raw" units of the Red Army in parts. By the way, our professional military could report to Stalin thoroughly with calculations, and not behave like Pavlov, for example, who lulled Stalin's vigilance with calm and rosy reports, for which, by the way, he suffered a well-deserved punishment. And so, unfortunately, we were doomed to suffer defeat in the initial period of the war.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 04: 51
          +29
          Quote: Proxima
          The Red Army was hopelessly losing to the Germans in terms of the number of troops entering the battle at the same time.

          In other words: communication, coordination and mobility.
          1. Catfish
            Catfish 10 June 2021 05: 18
            +22
            That's right, Vladimir, but mostly, of course, communication. We barely grew up to the level at which it was with the Germans only in the second half of the war and paid for it with a lot of blood. And coordination and mobility depend on communication.
            Do not remember how many radio-equipped tanks per battalion and fighters per squadron at the beginning of the war?
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 05: 22
              +8
              Quote: Sea Cat
              Do not remember how many radio-equipped tanks per battalion and fighters per squadron at the beginning of the war?

              Yes, there is no need to remember, it was sparse. ((
            2. Glory1974
              Glory1974 10 June 2021 09: 46
              +13
              How many radio-equipped tanks per battalion and fighters per squadron at the beginning of the war?

              Separately, it is difficult to say in terms of equipment, but of the total number of troops, the share of signalmen was 1-2%
              In 1945 this share increased to 10%
              1. Catfish
                Catfish 10 June 2021 10: 32
                +1
                What are we talking about.
              2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 12: 49
                +15
                Quote: glory1974
                but of the total number of troops, the share of signalmen was 1-2%

                the equipment of the signalmen was even sadder. On average, in June 1941, the rifle division had 100 telephones instead of 300, 4 switches instead of 50 and 300 km of cable instead of 1000 (figures from memory) And most importantly, there were no linear units in general... And this is taking into account the fact that military communications were provided mainly by the lines of the NCC. By the way, before the war, the situation with the "government" HF communication was not a fountain either.
            3. BAI
              BAI 10 June 2021 12: 00
              +7
              how many radio-equipped tanks did we have

              In the tank forces of the Red Army, for example, on April 1, 1941, only T-100, T-35 and KV tanks were equipped with radio stations by 28%. All the rest were divided into "radio" and "linear". On "radio" tanks, transceiver radio stations were installed, and on "line" tanks nothing was installed at all. The place for the radio station in the niche of the BT-7 or T-26 turret was occupied by a rack for 45-mm shots or disks for the DT machine gun. In addition, Voroshilov's aft machine guns were installed in the niches of the "linear" tanks.
              On April 1, 1941, the troops had 311 T-34 "line" tanks, that is, without a radio station, and 130 "radio", 2452 BT-7 "linear" and 1883 "radio", 510 BT-7M "linear" and 181 "radio", 1270 BT-5 "linear" and 402 "radio", finally, 3950 T-26 "linear" and 3345 "radio" (in relation to the T-26 we are talking only about single-turret tanks). Thus, of the 15 317 tanks of the types mentioned, only 6824 vehicles were equipped with radio stations, that is, 44%.

              From the same author:
              The Germans have tanks of the following types: T-I, T-II, T-III, T-IV, 35 (t), 38 (t):

              TI = 410 (approx. 20 pieces with transceiver radios)).

              = T-II 746 (only 60% with transmitting and receiving, IT'S 458pcs)

              T-III 1440 (only 29% with transceiver radios. THIS IS 518pcs)

              T-IV 439 (only 36% with transceiver radios, this is 158pcs)

              GERMAN 1154 (38%) TANK WITH RECEIVING-TRANSMITTING RADIO STATIONS from 3035pcs total

              Czechoslovak:
              35 (t) 149.

              38 (t) 623

              THE CZECH DIDN'T FIND THE RATIO, but for example let it be 45% or 347 pieces of receiving transmitting

              WHAT IT IS PRODUCED FROM 1501pcs (39%) with transceiver radio stations from Total: 3807

              6824 vehicles of the Red Army against 3807 at the Wehrmacht.
              Another thing is that German radio stations were incomparably better (as, by the way, and scope optics).
              1. Civil
                Civil 10 June 2021 15: 14
                +5
                Communication communication and communication again
              2. DrRey
                DrRey 10 June 2021 16: 40
                +11
                Great conclusion! We had more tanks with radio, but this is all bullshit - German radio stations are better. Or maybe it's just that the Germans have been ironing Europe since the age of 38 - they came, saw, everyone surrendered. The USSR in the conflict on Lake Khasan and on the Khalkhin-Gol River, as well as in the Finnish War, achieved victories with heavy losses, plus the formation of new formations required a large number of conscripts who were simply not trained, plus new equipment, plus the process of industrialization when needed all at once, and preferably yesterday. So we got it - an enemy ready for battle on the one hand and not ready on the other. An analogy from our history is the Battle of the Neva. Small squad of Prince Alexander deployed at the turn of the attack and the Swedish army in tents. The effect of surprise, panic, loss of communications, cutting off escape routes. All Swedes have merged.
                We were saved by the heroism of the Russian soldier and a little bit of scale.
              3. Pilat2009
                Pilat2009 16 June 2021 07: 34
                +1
                Quote: BAI
                how many radio-equipped tanks did we have

                In the tank forces of the Red Army, for example, on April 1, 1941, only T-100, T-35 and KV tanks were equipped with radio stations by 28%. All the rest were divided into "radio" and "linear". On "radio" tanks, transceiver radio stations were installed, and on "line" tanks nothing was installed at all. The place for the radio station in the niche of the BT-7 or T-26 turret was occupied by a rack for 45-mm shots or disks for the DT machine gun. In addition, Voroshilov's aft machine guns were installed in the niches of the "linear" tanks.
                On April 1, 1941, the troops had 311 T-34 "line" tanks, that is, without a radio station, and 130 "radio", 2452 BT-7 "linear" and 1883 "radio", 510 BT-7M "linear" and 181 "radio", 1270 BT-5 "linear" and 402 "radio", finally, 3950 T-26 "linear" and 3345 "radio" (in relation to the T-26 we are talking only about single-turret tanks). Thus, of the 15 317 tanks of the types mentioned, only 6824 vehicles were equipped with radio stations, that is, 44%.

                From the same author:
                The Germans have tanks of the following types: T-I, T-II, T-III, T-IV, 35 (t), 38 (t):

                TI = 410 (approx. 20 pieces with transceiver radios)).

                = T-II 746 (only 60% with transmitting and receiving, IT'S 458pcs)

                T-III 1440 (only 29% with transceiver radios. THIS IS 518pcs)

                T-IV 439 (only 36% with transceiver radios, this is 158pcs)

                GERMAN 1154 (38%) TANK WITH RECEIVING-TRANSMITTING RADIO STATIONS from 3035pcs total

                Czechoslovak:
                35 (t) 149.

                38 (t) 623

                THE CZECH DIDN'T FIND THE RATIO, but for example let it be 45% or 347 pieces of receiving transmitting

                WHAT IT IS PRODUCED FROM 1501pcs (39%) with transceiver radio stations from Total: 3807

                6824 vehicles of the Red Army against 3807 at the Wehrmacht.
                Another thing is that German radio stations were incomparably better (as, by the way, and scope optics).

                In 1941, the average resource of the T-34 without breakdowns was 200 km. I will remind you that there was such a first tank battle, when several mechanized corps had to go about 500 km
            4. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 12: 41
              +4
              Quote: Sea Cat
              And coordination and mobility depend on communication.
              Do not remember how many radio-equipped tanks per battalion and fighters per squadron at the beginning of the war?

              This is all at the level of tactical units. More broadly, the communication problem was much larger. With this, everything was dull. The military held on tight to good old wire communications using the overhead line network of the USSR NKS and Bodo's telegraphs. Although the issue of military communications was sharply raised immediately after Hasan. It took an argument in the form of the defeat of the Western Front, so that at the NPO they finally create a specialized structure - the Main Directorate of Communications of the Red Army. August 1941.
              Well, in addition to the saboteurs who sawed telegraph poles, air lines were deliberately destroyed with pieces.
            5. not main
              not main 11 June 2021 00: 58
              +3
              Quote: Sea Cat
              That's right, Vladimir, but mostly, of course, communication. We barely grew up to the level at which it was with the Germans only in the second half of the war and paid for it with a lot of blood. And coordination and mobility depend on communication.
              Do not remember how many radio-equipped tanks per battalion and fighters per squadron at the beginning of the war?

              Yes, mostly on command vehicles, but they also became the FIRST target! Especially considering the handrail antenna, on BT-5, BT-7. In aviation, the first and high-quality radio station appeared on the R-49, of course, except for British aircraft. Frankly they were ... about nothing!
          2. strannik1985
            strannik1985 10 June 2021 06: 44
            +8
            In other words

            Mobilization (including communication and mobility) and concentration (including coordination). Communication units were also deployed in the course of mobilization, from the national economy, in addition to people, they mobilized horses, cars, tractors - mobility. Coordination, i.e. units and formations spread across the entire territory of the districts, arrive as part of their corps / armies and can act together.
          3. chenia
            chenia 10 June 2021 08: 08
            +9
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            In other words: communication, coordination and mobility.


            But how could it be when the army was a complete organizational mess. Creation of new formations (and all at once) blurring of frames and disruption of the BP. As a result, the troops of constant readiness were unable to detain the enemy so much as to bring the reduced-strength troops into a combat state.
            The reason is paradoxical - the correct conclusion that the Germans are not ready for the 1941 war. Hence this approach to the construction of the aircraft (first, we will create a skeleton, and then we will increase and debug the meat). And the Germans were really not ready. Yes, if the Wehrmacht had hit the Red Army at the level of the end of 1941, down and feathers would have flown from it (weak weapons and a shitty organizational structure).
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 08: 16
              +8
              Quote: chenia
              The reason is paradoxical - the correct conclusion that the Germans are not ready for the 1941 war. Hence this approach to the construction of the aircraft (first, we will create a skeleton, and then we will increase and debug the meat).

              Interesting, but controversial, in my opinion, because by the end of 41 with radio communication and not only, the Red Army was still very weak.
              1. chenia
                chenia 10 June 2021 09: 02
                +19
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                because by the end of 41st with radio communication


                Yes, this is a third-rate cause of the disaster. We did not have time to create formations with combat-ready units. It is the subdivisions - platoon, company, battalion. I will say this, you can train people quickly enough. In less than two weeks we managed (according to our own experience). From a cropped unit to a full-fledged SME with a vocational school (although in the 70-80s we had a better reserve). But the team will be formed only in 3-4 months. And this determines resilience. Unfamiliar people who are not confident in each other (even if they are trained) are not able to withstand the stress of the battle. Crystallization (when an internal hierarchy is built in the team) occurs precisely during this period of 3-4 months. And unsure of each other, this is panic and a huge number of prisoners. In 1941 it was twice as much (in six months than in the whole of 1942).
                Not Siberian divisions pulled us out near Moscow, but divisions with 3-4 months of training. NKVD troops, cadets, border guards. where there was practically no blur in the frames were very persistent. Even the militias, where many are from one enterprise. institutions were more resilient. than the newly minted formations (which we had to throw into battle almost immediately after creation).
                So. that by the end of 1941 we had created a more or less staunch Red Army. And the failures of 1942 are losses (territorial, material, positional, psychological) of 1941.
                The Wehrmacht in 1942 was significantly stronger than in 1941, and overstrained.
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 10 June 2021 10: 33
                  +11
                  Quote: chenia
                  I will say this, you can train people quickly enough. In less than two weeks we managed (according to our own experience). From the cropped part to a full-fledged MSP with a vocational school (though in the 70-80s we had a better reserve)

                  Exactly.
                  In the 40s, it will not be possible to quickly educate people. First of all, because of the low level of education of those who need to be taught, and most importantly, those who will teach them. 2/3 of the privates of the first year of service and 1/3 of the junior command staff with the formation of the 3rd grade in the BTV KOVO is a reality in 1941.
                  In the infantry, the situation is no better:
                  The knowledge of ordinary cadets is low.
                  They are completely unaware of automatic weapons and can only carry rifles and pull the trigger. Extremely poor knowledge of the materiel of small arms and, besides, the gunners do not know at all the names of the parts of the DP machine gun and the revolver. Machine gunners do not know the name of the parts and the rules for disassembling the rifle. To the great shame and chagrin, the cadets of the regimental schools have little knowledge of small arms below the knowledge of the Red Army, and yet despite this they are graduated by junior commanders.
                  There is no need to talk about the rules, cleaning weapons, and their inspection by younger commanders.
                  This situation should be, since the commander, having no knowledge of small arms, cannot transfer them to his subordinates and demand knowledge from them when he himself does not know him.
                  © The KOVO weapons verification act for the 1940th year.
                  This is 97 RD. The one whose headquarters was rated as the most advanced in the Red Army and was awarded the challenge prize of the General Staff. And the commander of which received KZ for the organization of combat and political training and the training of troops.
                  1. chenia
                    chenia 10 June 2021 14: 35
                    +9
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    In the 40s, it will not be possible to train people quickly. First of all, due to the low level of education of those who need to be taught

                    In the infantry, you can train fighters from scratch in a month. For that time, weapons and tactics were not very complex.
                    For armored vehicles (from scratch) is clearly not enough (therefore, in my time, tank units were the most numerous in cropped parts and connections - always in the presence of mechanical water and com. tanks. Gunners and loaders (where necessary) from the registered office - here for three months.
                    Artillery - also up to 3 months.
                    Combat support units are also somewhere like that.
                    If there is a prepared reserve, it is multiples of less time (I will say right away - these are those who previously served in the corresponding VUS, or at least served).

                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    and most importantly - those who will teach them. 2/3 privates of the first year of service and 1/3 of junior command personnel with

                    Training is carried out (by 90%) com. companies (there are practically no platoon cadre officers) practically alone, gradually involving platoon commanders and sergeants (all enrolled).

                    And here is the question. But was it possible to pierce the power supply unit with such reorganization and personnel leapfrog.

                    Quote: Herman 4223
                    Troops not deployed to wartime states are ineffective.

                    more correctly less than 2/3 of the state.
                    The troops of constant readiness have - had (in groups of troops from 100 to 95% and were supplemented by civilian teachers, housing office workers, etc., and they were not sent to the Union. They were assigned to units. In the Union, as a rule, 70-80% of the staff As a complete compound, so as one of the units of a cropped division.

                    Due to the failure of the BP and organizational measures, I indicated the causes and consequences. These troops did not provide an opportunity (did not gain time) to bring reduced formations to a less combat state. This happened only towards the end of 1941.
                    And so we threw the newly minted divisions like firewood under the feet of the Wehrmacht to slow down the yoke of pressure.
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 10 June 2021 16: 32
                      +3
                      Quote: chenia
                      In the infantry, you can train fighters from scratch in a month.

                      If there is a trained junior command staff, yes. In the CA of the 70s and 80s, this was not a big problem.
                      But in the Red Army of the 30s, the junior commanders often either do not exist, or their training leaves much to be desired. What can a commander teach subordinates who did not take binoculars to observation classes? Or another commander who confuses the names of the weapon parts?
                      1. chenia
                        chenia 10 June 2021 18: 58
                        +9
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        In the CA of the 70s and 80s, this was not a big problem.


                        Not! then two weeks were enough, with artillery. Let's be honest, the commanders of guns and gunners, they served in the troops with this VUS (thanks to the military registration and enlistment office and the agreement with them - do not be naughty). The rest of the battery commander (CD, NShD and three battalion commanders, all officers, no platoon regiment in the cropped regiment.) Prepares himself (well, there is an assistant to the battery commander in the form of a ranger). master, radiotelephonists, etc., gun numbers - elementary). On the first day, the standards were perfectly fulfilled with the disassembly of the shutter. After 15 days, both the charges are made up, and the coordinates of the targets are determined, the engineering equipment of the KNP and OP is in the best possible form, and is directed and bred laughing , and to the landfill at the vocational school. The enemy will be defeated, victory will be ours.
                        That's all for me - I don't think that the infantry of the 40s, this is something super complicated. Mastering shooters and elementary tactics (which, after a few runs, can be brought to automatism) for a week. And the engineering equipment of the positions, the fire system is still in charge of the officer, with a precise indication of what to do to whom. True, if someone did not serve, then it is necessary to explain where he ended up - regulations, outfits, drill. Those. KMB.

                        There was a selection in the BTV, and the mech.vodov and tank commanders were trained in training units. But in the parts of the power supply unit was not, and could not be. It was necessary to deal with the improvement of the places of deployment of the newly formed formations, with the constant flickering of commanders (because even newer units appear and commanders are needed there).
                        This is when new faces constantly appear in the regiments (many who had nothing to do with the BTV), and at the same speed they disappear to a new duty station. By the way, the fighters too. And this applies even to the first-stage MK.
            2. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 16 June 2021 12: 43
              0
              Quote: chenia
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              In other words: communication, coordination and mobility.


              But how could it be when the army was a complete organizational mess. Creation of new formations (and all at once) blurring of frames and disruption of the BP. As a result, the troops of constant readiness were unable to detain the enemy so much as to bring the reduced-strength troops into a combat state.
              The reason is paradoxical - the correct conclusion that the Germans are not ready for the 1941 war. Hence this approach to the construction of the aircraft (first, we will create a skeleton, and then we will increase and debug the meat). And the Germans were really not ready. Yes, if the Wehrmacht had hit the Red Army at the level of the end of 1941, down and feathers would have flown from it (weak weapons and a shitty organizational structure).

              This is doubtful. If the Germans had not attacked, we would have continued to churn out the I-16 and T-28, Mosin and TB rifles. And then, the Germans very carefully planned the strikes, analyzed the situation, because all the victories of the Red Army were due to the numerical superiority, but planning learned more or less in 42
              1. chenia
                chenia 16 June 2021 14: 37
                +1
                Quote: Pilat2009
                It is doubtful

                The loss of prisoners of the Red Army for six months in 1941 - 40% (for the entire war).
                And if there were a ratio of 1942, it would be four times less. But the losses in 1942 are also a consequence of the losses in 1941.
                Yes, the Germans would have advanced somewhere to the Dnieper. And they would have run out of opportunity to advance in all directions by August (in real life, 1941 in the fall). And we surpassed them quantitatively (both in people and in weapons). Let us recall 1942 - the same year of our unsuccessful offensives (until November). We attacked (and tried to do it).
                Even in 1941 - Moscow, these are mistakes near Kiev. If we had withdrawn the SWF (main forces) to the encirclement (as Budyonny suggested) or stayed in Kiev, as Kirponos wanted, it would be extremely risky for the Germans to attack Moscow (Zhukov in 1945 did not rush to Berlin 60 km away, and rightly so).
                But if the Germans hadn't gotten so close to Moscow, Stalingrad wouldn't have been there. Zhukov, instead of strikes on Rzhev (where the Germans easily and simply calculated the directions of these strikes, in operational terms this is too obvious), he would have slammed into the flank of Group A, which was extremely difficult for the Germans to ensure.

                Here the main message is that the Germans in 1941 were not ready for a war with the USSR in 1941.

                And they were very lucky that they got into the moment of our "dressing up". This is just the most inopportune moment for us.
                1. Pilat2009
                  Pilat2009 16 June 2021 16: 40
                  +1
                  Quote: chenia
                  Let us recall 1942 - the same year of our unsuccessful offensives (until November). We attacked (and tried to do it).
                  Even in 1941 -Moscow, these are mistakes near Kiev

                  So this is what we are talking about, that they learned to plan with blood and sweat. But at the beginning of the war the number of the Wehrmacht on the western border outnumbered the Red Army in people. But in total during the war years, 30 million were called up in the Red Army and in Germany 15-19 million.
          4. Herman 4223
            Herman 4223 10 June 2021 12: 46
            +4
            In other words, preemptive deployment. Troops not deployed to wartime states are ineffective. They cannot be moved anywhere or sent into battle. Therefore, there were only covering forces on the border, more or less filled at the expense of large training fees. These forces were superior to the Wehrmacht. The rest were either in places of deployment or moving towards the border. They all got into battle in turn. The first two weeks of the war, the Red Army did not have troops mobilized before the wartime states.
          5. zenion
            zenion 11 June 2021 19: 48
            +1
            I also think so, but then, after all. It turns out that not only I think so, but here they think so massively. Where were you and we before the war, during the war and after the whole war?
        2. qQQQ
          qQQQ 10 June 2021 09: 24
          +11
          Quote: Proxima
          The Red Army was inferior to the Wehrmacht in the main: the Red Army was hopelessly losing to the Germans in terms of the number of troops entering the battle at the same time.

          In my opinion, all the same, the Red Army was catastrophically losing to the Wehrmacht in the level of command training at all levels, and from here our blunders are already stretching. We had competent commanders, but if the neighbors on the left and right were defeated, then the result is obvious.
          1. Herman 4223
            Herman 4223 13 June 2021 00: 15
            +2
            There were also problems with this. When Hitler came to power, there were only seven divisions in the German army. He began to rapidly increase the composition of the army, new corps and divisions were formed in large numbers. As a result, commanders of all levels were promoted very quickly in positions without gaining experience in management at a lower level. Such an expansion of the German army went on from 1933 until the beginning of the war, with the war it continued and there were added losses there.
            1. Shiden
              Shiden 13 June 2021 10: 50
              +3
              You are wrong von Seckt created the Reichswehr with a view to expanding the army, where the private became a non-commissioned officer, a non-commissioned platoon commander, a platoon company commander, and so on. And it turned out that the middle and high command personnel in the Wehrmacht were not observed.
              1. Herman 4223
                Herman 4223 13 June 2021 11: 27
                +1
                Sight is sight, but real experience is different. To turn seven divisions into 90 in seven years, all this will go astray in any army. In the red army before the war, the same process went. When one hundred divisions were turned into two hundred in one year, and then three hundred. Hence the lack of experience of the command staff.
                1. Shiden
                  Shiden 13 June 2021 12: 10
                  +3
                  Do you forget that the basis of the SD attack aircraft in Germany was made up of veterans and the organization was only conditionally called paramilitary, and after the reprisal against Rem, only the party nomenclature remained in the Wehrmacht and the military wing was taken away. Plus six Austrian divisions, so there was a personnel reserve, which was demonstrated by the Polish and Western Company. Unlike the USSR, where the mandatory military conscription was only before the Second World War.
        3. Glory1974
          Glory1974 10 June 2021 09: 44
          +3
          The Red Army was hopelessly losing to the Germans in terms of the number of troops entering the battle at the same time. That is, the German machine, fine-tuned for two years of the war, primitively smashed the "raw" units of the Red Army in parts.

          I agree with you.
          According to the combat regulations of the late 30s, the battle formation of the troops was divided into an attacking group, a support group, a reserve group, etc. It turned out that out of the total number of the division of 7-8 thousand fighters, 400-500 were conducting the attack. Only with the beginning of the war did they begin to break this vicious practice, create 1st and 2nd echelons, bring the order of battle to what we have now.
        4. Basil50
          Basil50 10 June 2021 11: 43
          -3
          Obolensky
          Hitler's invading army numbered just under 8000000 (eight million) officers, plus about a million satellites. THE ENTIRE RED ARMY for 1941 was slightly less than 5000000 (five million) fighters and commanders. 1500000 (one and a half million) in the Far East and Central Asia, about 1000000 (million) in Transcaucasia, awaited the invasion of the French-British.
          The RED ARMY was urgently deployed from the beginning of 1941, but they did not have time, so the mobilization warehouses fell to the Germans. But Pavlov's frank betrayal should not be forgotten either. During the attack, the Germans very much hoped for a military coup, especially since they had experience in Spain, when Trotsky's admirers captured Madrid and staged terror against the COMMUNISTS when the Nazis attacked.
          1. icant007
            icant007 11 June 2021 06: 54
            +3
            Quote: Vasily50
            The RED ARMY was urgently deployed from the beginning of 1941,


            It was deployed as far as they could without announcing mobilization.
            In fact, all the forces from the inner districts were raked out by the armies of the 2nd echelon, 16, 19, 22, 24, 28 armies.
            And then there were simply no troops.
            The remaining troops, as you correctly say, performed the task of covering the border in Central Asia, Transcaucasia, Siberia and the Far East.
            And then they began frantically to form new armies. At the end of June, on the basis of the command personnel of the border and internal troops of the NKVD, they began to form a new army group 31, 32, and so on. The newly minted divisions of the people's militia also went there.
        5. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 10 June 2021 17: 02
          0
          Quote: Proxima
          By the way, our professional military personnel could report to Stalin thoroughly with calculations.

          Yes, we could) Try it. But it is unlikely to report. Not very smart, but greedy for distinctions and awards, colleagues gladly buried such "upstarts" with denunciations, and even provocations. After all, "every problem has a position, name and surname," remember? And when they start looking for these very names, they will certainly find them! Due to the fact that the main officer corps of the Red Army at that time was illiterate, poorly matched the positions and everyone knew a huge number of jambs. There were truth seekers. Some went to the camp, some fell from their posts, and some simply got a bullet. Times were simpler then ...
      2. Kisa
        Kisa 10 June 2021 06: 57
        +4
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        Get up country is huge

        hmm an interesting historical moment in the wiki they write -
        ... Fadeev considered Lebedev-Kumach a cowardly opportunist and said that during the battle for Moscow, Lebedev-Kumach immediately tried to escape from the city, “brought two pickup trucks of things to the station, could not load them for two days and became mentally distraught”
        ... for some reason I remembered the current Soloviev with his Como Lake ...

        and about the conspiracy of shpiens -
        During the discussion of the planned attack on the USSR, some of the generals tried to convince the Fuhrer that it was premature to get involved in a war with the Russians. Hitler's answer was as follows [87]:
        80% of the command cadres of the Red Army have been destroyed. The Red Army is beheaded, weakened as never before, this is the main factor in my decision. We need to fight until the cadres grow up again ...
        having an advantage in tanks people and got five boilers of half a million each
        1. Pilat2009
          Pilat2009 16 June 2021 12: 57
          +1
          Quote: kitty
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          Get up country is huge

          hmm an interesting historical moment in the wiki they write -
          ... Fadeev considered Lebedev-Kumach a cowardly opportunist and said that during the battle for Moscow, Lebedev-Kumach immediately tried to escape from the city, “brought two pickup trucks of things to the station, could not load them for two days and became mentally distraught”
          ... for some reason I remembered the current Soloviev with his Como Lake ...

          and about the conspiracy of shpiens -
          During the discussion of the planned attack on the USSR, some of the generals tried to convince the Fuhrer that it was premature to get involved in a war with the Russians. Hitler's answer was as follows [87]:
          80% of the command cadres of the Red Army have been destroyed. The Red Army is beheaded, weakened as never before, this is the main factor in my decision. We need to fight until the cadres grow up again ...
          having an advantage in tanks people and got five boilers of half a million each

          But the manpower reserves of the USSR were much higher than those of Germany.
          1. ccsr
            ccsr 16 June 2021 13: 36
            -8
            Quote: Pilat2009
            But the manpower reserves of the USSR were much higher than those of Germany.

            The human reserves of Germany and its European allies were significantly higher than the population of the USSR, not to mention the fact that the total military potential of this coalition significantly exceeded that of the Soviet Union. You naively do not know this, or so, you decided to brainwash us according to the training manual?
            1. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 16 June 2021 16: 57
              +1
              Quote: ccsr
              Quote: Pilat2009
              But the manpower reserves of the USSR were much higher than those of Germany.

              The human reserves of Germany and its European allies were significantly higher than the population of the USSR, not to mention the fact that the total military potential of this coalition significantly exceeded that of the Soviet Union. You naively do not know this, or so, you decided to brainwash us according to the training manual?

              If all European countries had fought for Germany, then the war would have ended in 41. Did you not know that? Even some of Germany's allies sabotaged military actions against the USSR in every possible way. For example, Finland waged a trench war in the North throughout the war, as Hitler did not urge her on, therefore I got off minimally. Spain generally put a bolt on Hitler's Wishlist, which allowed Franco to hold out until the 1970s. The Italians were employed in Africa. And so on and so on.
              1. ccsr
                ccsr 16 June 2021 18: 38
                -7
                Quote: Pilat2009
                If all European countries had fought for Germany, the war would have ended in 41.

                Nonsense, if only because ALL European countries could not fight with Hitler against the USSR. But there were many of them:
                September 27, 1940 in Berlin, the Tripartite Pact was signed by the closest military allies of Germany, Italy and Japan. And then it was signed by: Hungary - November 20, 1940, Romania - November 23, 1940, Slovakia - November 24, 1940. In December 1940, Berlin was an agreement was reached on participation in the war against the Soviet Union of Finland. On March 1, 1941, the Germans forced Bulgaria to sign the "Pact of Three" and on April 18, Croatia seceded from Yugoslavia. Hitler also considered Franco's Spain and, to a lesser extent, Turkey as allies, with which the Treaty of Friendship was concluded on June 18, 1941 ...
                One of Berlin's main allies was Romania, which declared war on us on June 22. Before the start of the Great Patriotic War, Romania deployed 17,5 divisions, about 350 thousand soldiers and officers, 3255 guns and mortars, 60 tanks, 423 aircraft on the border with the USSR.

                Quote: Pilat2009
                Even some of Germany's allies sabotaged military operations against the USSR in every possible way.

                How do we know about their "sabotage" on the Eastern Front - in France, the death toll in the ranks of the Wehrmacht is twice as high as the losses of the entire Resistance.
                Quote: Pilat2009
                For example, Finland waged a trench warfare throughout the war in the North, as Hitler did not urge her on, so she got off minimally.

                Don't lie:
                Finland's war crimes on the territory of the USSR.
                Often they excelled their German counterparts in terms of ingenuity in atrocities. The Finns half destroyed Petrozavodsk. They destroyed and burned many settlements. The civilian population was placed in concentration camps and used as free labor. They methodically destroyed the population in the occupied territory.
                According to foreign press reports of that period, they used Russian prisoners of war for medical experiments. They subjected prisoners of war to torture and humiliation. Burning out the stars and peeling off the skin, cutting off the feet and burning a living person is common.

                https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5a5141281410c318a507fee5/voennye-prestupleniia-finliandii-na-territorii-sssr-5c24c17dbd227500ab1d3380
                Quote: Pilat2009
                Spain generally put a bolt on Hitler's Wishlist,

                Lying again:
                Blue division on the Eastern Front: how the Spanish volunteers fought against the USSR
                Hitler spoke about the soldiers of the Wehrmacht's 250th Infantry Division, consisting of the Spaniards: “You can't imagine more fearless guys. Like, "they trample death." In the Soviet Union, they were perceived as mercenaries of the dictator Franco, and they were partly right. But most of the volunteers in Madrid wanted to be passionate lovers in Russia, which, however, did not prevent them from fighting well with our soldiers.
                Quote: Pilat2009
                .Italians were busy in Africa. And so on and so on.

                Where did their cemeteries near Voronezh come from, about which there was a scandal several years ago?
                1. Pilat2009
                  Pilat2009 17 June 2021 08: 57
                  +2
                  Quote: ccsr
                  Quote: Pilat2009
                  If all European countries had fought for Germany, the war would have ended in 41.

                  Nonsense, if only because ALL European countries could not fight with Hitler against the USSR. But there were many of them:
                  September 27, 1940 in Berlin, the Tripartite Pact was signed by the closest military allies of Germany, Italy and Japan. And then it was signed by: Hungary - November 20, 1940, Romania - November 23, 1940, Slovakia - November 24, 1940. In December 1940, Berlin was an agreement was reached on participation in the war against the Soviet Union of Finland. On March 1, 1941, the Germans forced Bulgaria to sign the "Pact of Three" and on April 18, Croatia seceded from Yugoslavia. Hitler also considered Franco's Spain and, to a lesser extent, Turkey as allies, with which the Treaty of Friendship was concluded on June 18, 1941 ...
                  One of Berlin's main allies was Romania, which declared war on us on June 22. Before the start of the Great Patriotic War, Romania deployed 17,5 divisions, about 350 thousand soldiers and officers, 3255 guns and mortars, 60 tanks, 423 aircraft on the border with the USSR.

                  Quote: Pilat2009
                  Even some of Germany's allies sabotaged military operations against the USSR in every possible way.

                  How do we know about their "sabotage" on the Eastern Front - in France, the death toll in the ranks of the Wehrmacht is twice as high as the losses of the entire Resistance.
                  Quote: Pilat2009
                  For example, Finland waged a trench warfare throughout the war in the North, as Hitler did not urge her on, so she got off minimally.

                  Don't lie:
                  Finland's war crimes on the territory of the USSR.
                  Often they excelled their German counterparts in terms of ingenuity in atrocities. The Finns half destroyed Petrozavodsk. They destroyed and burned many settlements. The civilian population was placed in concentration camps and used as free labor. They methodically destroyed the population in the occupied territory.
                  According to foreign press reports of that period, they used Russian prisoners of war for medical experiments. They subjected prisoners of war to torture and humiliation. Burning out the stars and peeling off the skin, cutting off the feet and burning a living person is common.

                  https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5a5141281410c318a507fee5/voennye-prestupleniia-finliandii-na-territorii-sssr-5c24c17dbd227500ab1d3380
                  Quote: Pilat2009
                  Spain generally put a bolt on Hitler's Wishlist,

                  Lying again:
                  Blue division on the Eastern Front: how the Spanish volunteers fought against the USSR
                  Hitler spoke about the soldiers of the Wehrmacht's 250th Infantry Division, consisting of the Spaniards: “You can't imagine more fearless guys. Like, "they trample death." In the Soviet Union, they were perceived as mercenaries of the dictator Franco, and they were partly right. But most of the volunteers in Madrid wanted to be passionate lovers in Russia, which, however, did not prevent them from fighting well with our soldiers.
                  Quote: Pilat2009
                  .Italians were busy in Africa. And so on and so on.

                  Where did their cemeteries near Voronezh come from, about which there was a scandal several years ago?

                  I beg you. One division of the Spaniards, one division of the Italians. 60 Romanian tanks ... the Finns have reached the border during the winter war. You compare the number of groups of the Wehrmacht and the Red Army in any operation since 1942
                  1. ccsr
                    ccsr 17 June 2021 12: 24
                    -7
                    Quote: Pilat2009
                    I beg you ... one Spanish division, one Italian division. 60 Romanian tanks ...

                    Dexterously you rebuilt, at first they said about Germany's human resources that they were supposedly smaller, and now when they gave you data on who fought on the side of the Germans, you immediately began to indicate only the number of divisions, forgetting that they were replenished not by the Germans, but by Hitler's allies. But the point is not even this, but the fact that the human resources of the allies worked for the military might of Germany, supplying weapons and products, that is, they made it possible to compensate for the losses of the Wehrmacht throughout the war.
                    Quote: Pilat2009
                    you will compare the number of groups of the Wehrmacht and the Red Army in any operation since 1942

                    How does this relate to the total population of Germany and its European allies? By the way, you forget about those countries that were occupied by Germany, and of which many people also fought against the USSR - Poland, the Baltic States, the Czech Republic, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark.
                    1. Pilat2009
                      Pilat2009 17 June 2021 21: 05
                      -1
                      Quote: ccsr
                      Quote: Pilat2009
                      I beg you ... one Spanish division, one Italian division. 60 Romanian tanks ...

                      Dexterously you rebuilt, at first they said about Germany's human resources that they were supposedly smaller, and now when they gave you data on who fought on the side of the Germans, you immediately began to indicate only the number of divisions, forgetting that they were replenished not by the Germans, but by Hitler's allies. But the point is not even this, but the fact that the human resources of the allies worked for the military might of Germany, supplying weapons and products, that is, they made it possible to compensate for the losses of the Wehrmacht throughout the war.
                      Quote: Pilat2009
                      you will compare the number of groups of the Wehrmacht and the Red Army in any operation since 1942

                      How does this relate to the total population of Germany and its European allies? By the way, you forget about those countries that were occupied by Germany, and of which many people also fought against the USSR - Poland, the Baltic States, the Czech Republic, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark.

                      Something bad Europe worked for Germany. For example, I did not hear that tanks somewhere other than Germany itself were made. Or planes. Once again. Do not count the entire population of Europe, they did not serve in the army and participated in the war insofar as. And their quality it was much worse than that of the Wehrmacht, despite all the kicks. Count the number of mobilized. And do not forget to send part of this amount to the Western Front and to Africa. So, by the way, the USSR produced tanks and self-propelled guns during the war - 105251; BA - 8505, this is without taking into account pre-war production. Another 10 thousand came under the lend-lease. The loss of Soviet tanks from 41-45 years-82 thousand units.
                      Germany produced during the war years tanks and self-propelled guns - 46857; BTR and BA - 26651. Total losses of German armored vehicles from June 22, 1941 to May 9, 1945: 28735 pcs.
      3. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 10 June 2021 14: 13
        0
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        Stalin prepared the country and society for a big war. The people prepared for labor and defense
        And what songs were: "Get up, huge country, get up to mortal combat" ...
        good good and songs, Vladimir and the youth were ready to defend the Motherland! There was an article about pre-war money with images of the military!
      4. bubalik
        bubalik 11 June 2021 22: 05
        +7
        were: "Get up, huge country, get up to mortal combat" ...
        ,, and stood up. Grandfather was called on June 24 and into the flesh to Courland. And 41 three times left the encirclement and did not give up. And he met Victory, and he was not alone. So it’s not easy.
    2. magdama
      magdama 10 June 2021 04: 32
      +2
      The people are brought up by the top. During the war, this was fully manifested. Stalin prepared the country for war in 10 years.
    3. Finches
      Finches 10 June 2021 05: 23
      +8
      The Russian peasant's leaven turned out to be stronger ...!
      1. NIKN
        NIKN 10 June 2021 12: 36
        +3
        development
        Quote: Finches
        The Russian peasant's leaven turned out to be stronger ...!
        But the author writes
        If materially the Soviet Union has achieved tremendous success, then in the moral and psychological sphere he was an unstable system in a dangerous period
        the truth itself immediately refutes this with a whole list. wink
    4. Bar1
      Bar1 10 June 2021 06: 51
      +4
      .
      They managed to present the pulling of their forces to the East as a deceit, disinformation


      how stupid to think so, it's like imagining two people opposite each other, one puts on brass knuckles, gets into a fighting stance and swings to strike, and the second looks complacently at all these actions, does nothing for defense and only insults one thing: ...
      But the most important thing is that historians are constantly repeating about this, about deception, about the fact that there will be no offensive of ready-made armies near the border, instead of exploring the real, real picture of that time.
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 10 June 2021 09: 53
        +3
        historians constantly repeat about this, about deception, about the fact that there will be no offensive of ready-made armies near the border, instead of exploring the real, real picture of that time.

        Liberals poured mud and no one wants to go into details.
        And if you read history, you can see amazing things.
        For example, in his memoirs, Kaganovich writes that on Stalin's instructions, in order to prepare for war in 1940, a secret fund was created to create stocks of materials critical for the defense industry.
        After such information, you begin to understand that Stalin was preparing for war. But if we admit this, it means that they poured mud on the leader in vain. It turns out that he needs rehabilitation ?!
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 10 June 2021 10: 36
        +7
        Quote: Bar1
        It’s as if you imagine two people opposite each other, one puts on brass knuckles, gets into a fighting stance and swings to strike, and the second looks complacently at all these actions, does nothing for defense and says one thing: “I don’t believe”.

        So three people took part in this fight. The first pretended to swing towards the third - in a completely different direction. And against the second he imitated a defensive stance so that he would not get into battle.
        1. Bar1
          Bar1 10 June 2021 20: 20
          +4
          Quote: Alexey RA
          As in this fight there were three. The first pretended to swing towards the third - in a completely different direction. And against the second he imitated a defensive stance so that he would not get into battle.


          what are the losses of England in 2 mv? And no half a million? Therefore, England, as a participant in the fight, is excluded.

          In general, a return to the question that has already been repeatedly raised here:
          What was not visible from Moscow, what is the accumulation of forces on the border of the USSR?

          Some eccentrics claim that the MILLION grouping near the borders of the USSR was completely invisible, and the fact that on June 22 that Napoleon crossed the border into Ingushetia did not alert anyone? Maybe all the same it should have been overlooked, than not overlooked?
          Martirosyan claims that it was Zhukov and Timoshenko who did not fulfill Stalin's order by June 22 - FULL COMMITMENT, but there is no evidence of this. Therefore, the beginning of the war looks strange, everyone knew, no one was ready, it seems that there was some kind of collusion / agreement in any case, Stalin from responsibility for the fact that he missed the beginning of the war should not be removed.
      3. stalkerwalker
        stalkerwalker 10 June 2021 10: 54
        +10
        Quote: Bar1
        But the most important thing is that historians constantly repeat about this, about deception, about the fact that there will be no offensive of ready-made armies near the border, instead of exploring the real, real picture of that time

        Firstly, historians have researched this "picture" more than once. And really serious historians have already delivered a verdict on this matter.
        Secondly, the afterthought of what happened, with a detailed description of the events before and after 22.06.41/XNUMX/XNUMX, forces many characters to give their categorical assessment. The only problem is that the amount of information that the military-political leadership of the USSR had did not give rise to any reason to doubt that there would be a war. It all came down to the start dates. And this moment is very important, because the level of anti-Bolshevism at that time was as overwhelming as the level of Russophobia today. And no one, I repeat - no one, gave guarantees that other countries, for example, the United States, would take the side of Germany. A pretext was required for declaring the USSR an aggressor country. And then the situation would be a hundred times worse.
        Thirdly, the degree of readiness of the Red Army for active hostilities was at a very low level. And the military-political leadership was aware of the fact that "a war with little blood on foreign territory" was nothing more than a propaganda move. Otherwise, there would be no plans to evacuate industry from the western regions of the country up to Moscow. And the evacuation itself was much better than it was during the First World War.
        1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
          Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 14: 40
          0
          Quote: stalkerwalker
          A pretext was required for declaring the USSR an aggressor country.

          The USSR was already declared an aggressor country and kicked out of the League of Nations in December 1939.
          1. stalkerwalker
            stalkerwalker 10 June 2021 15: 07
            +7
            Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
            The USSR was already declared an aggressor country and kicked out of the League of Nations in December 1939

            The question at stake was whether the USSR would fall under the lend-lease article of March 1941. Some heads in the US Senate didn't think so.
            1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 16: 51
              -2
              Quote: stalkerwalker
              The question at stake was whether the USSR would fall under the lend-lease article of March 1941.

              and what obstacles were there?
              1. stalkerwalker
                stalkerwalker 10 June 2021 20: 08
                +5
                Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                and what obstacles were there?

                Franklin Roosevelt was supposed to pass an amendment through the Senate on the provision of assistance to the USSR.
                Given the fact that there were enough representatives of pro-German views in both the Senate and Congress, and the richest families did business with Germany, the amendment was not easy. And some still believed that the war in Europe should not concern the United States.
                Now I don’t remember exactly, but the voices diverged in a ratio of 7: 5. There was no unanimous decision.
        2. Bar1
          Bar1 10 June 2021 20: 32
          -1
          Quote: stalkerwalker
          serious historians


          There are no "serious historians". This notorious "seriousness" can be assessed by the amount of something written and, accordingly, received in banknotes for this, but for the quality of the content there are no assessments.



          Quote: stalkerwalker
          It all came down to the start dates. And this moment is very important, because the level of anti-Bolshevism at that time was as overwhelming as the level of Russophobia today.


          The beginning of the war on June 22, the day of EQUALITY, the Slavic holiday of Ivan Kupala, when Napoleon crossed the border and ALL of Europe entered the war with Russia or with Tartary, this is still the same thing.

          Quote: stalkerwalker
          ... A pretext was required for declaring the USSR an aggressor country.


          Germany is not Finland and not Poland, our former lands, so the Germans were met at the border, the new border and there were no reasons for aggression, and could not be, if you are not Suvorov.
    5. out of habit
      out of habit 10 June 2021 07: 18
      +3
      So the people became Soviet by themselves, perhaps, without the actions of the top?
  2. OloxDbahax
    OloxDbahax 10 June 2021 04: 42
    0
    Stalin knew that there would be a clash with the Wehrmacht.
    But he was "blinded" by the might of the Red Army. The first doctrine was then - "we will beat the enemy on his territory."
    When the enemy attacked and went in a thin wedge to Kiev. Instead of cutting off this wedge, the Headquarters issued directive N3 - with the two main armies to attack the enemy's main force deep into its rear, but not the enemy's wedge. A few days later, our two main armies were completely defeated. And the enemy expanded his blow.
    Instead, the Headquarters had to issue a directive - "cut off the wedge and dig in." Then they were more or less able to repulse the enemy, thereby gaining time for the retreating forces and the further creation of defensive fortifications on the second and third echelons ...
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 04: 50
      +14
      Quote: OloxDbahax
      And the enemy expanded his blow.
      You write epics, with such a syllable. laughing
      Because with the real story, things are still so-so for you.
      1. OloxDbahax
        OloxDbahax 10 June 2021 05: 02
        -6
        It was then necessary to dig in and break the wedge with two blows from both sides, and then break the enemy's vanguard in the cauldron.
        And the first major victory was able to buy time to strengthen the defending armies.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 05: 41
          +17
          Quote: OloxDbahax
          It was then necessary to dig in and break the wedge with two blows from both sides, and then break the enemy's vanguard in the cauldron.

          The fact that the Wehrmacht endured such "digging in" for the whole 41 years is clearly unknown to you.
          1. OloxDbahax
            OloxDbahax 10 June 2021 06: 11
            -4
            Of course, you cannot judge this now.
            How everything was is unknown to us. When they reported around, the commanders were often arrested.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 10 June 2021 10: 58
          +2
          Quote: OloxDbahax
          It was then necessary to dig in and break the wedge with two blows from both sides

          Well, Muzychenko has dug in. So his infantry needed two mechanized corps to contain the enemy.
          The RKKA-41 is not in a tough defense. Even the UR and 203-mm howitzers do not help - the Germans broke into the same Stalin Line with filling in 3-4 days.
        3. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
          Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 17: 12
          0
          Quote: OloxDbahax
          It was then necessary to dig in and break the wedge with two blows from both sides, and then break the enemy's vanguard in the cauldron.

          just extravaganza ... laughing
          So:
          we dig two rows of trenches perpendicular to the enemy's deployment line. We put two armies in them, fronts to each other and wait for von Bock to throw his vanguard in the defile. As soon as the last baggage train with the waitresses dusts past the ambushes, here we are from both sides ka-a-ak we will hand over the stupid Teutons with a valiant “Hurray! And it's in the bag. Privates - 100 grams each, commanders - leave and sleepers, prisoners - to socialist construction sites.
          In general, as Chapaev said - "I did not finish at your academies ..."
    2. ver_
      ver_ 10 June 2021 10: 21
      -6
      ..Dzhugashvili was a sick man .., on the whole head .. Professor Bekhterev was sent 3 days after his * visit * to Dzhugashvili .. No matter how careful Bekhterev was, Dzhugashvili * checked * his questions from other doctors and realized that he had paranoia .. This no one should know .. He did not trust anyone, let alone his entourage .. Hitler was far away, and the courtiers were nearby .. In his youth I had to read Georgy Zhukov - a butcher .. His direct fault is that he did not * bring the directive * of the General Staff about the possible * provocation of the Germans * on June 22, 1942 .., and the fortifications were not prepared. districts .. Only the border guards and the Brest Fortress resisted .. The weapons were in the warehouses .. And so it happened that there was one rifle for 10 people ..
      1. The comment was deleted.
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 10 June 2021 10: 50
      +1
      Quote: OloxDbahax
      Stalin knew that there would be a clash with the Wehrmacht.
      But he was "blinded" by the might of the Red Army.

      Uh-huh ... so blinded that in 1940, following the results of the victory over Finland, he threw out his creature from the post of People's Commissar - the unsinkable Voroshilov.
      After the meeting on the results of the SFV, after the transfer of the NKO to Timoshenko, after the meeting of the senior leadership of the RKKA on December 23-31, 1940, the IVS's illusions regarding the fighting efficiency of the RKKA diminished significantly.
      Quote: OloxDbahax
      The first doctrine was then - "we will beat the enemy on his territory."

      Don't confuse propaganda with doctrine. In the USSR, these were two different, often not overlapping things.
      It should be noted that the propaganda speeches of political and military leaders contained somewhat different tasks than the military plans developed under their leadership. So, in 1936, K. Ye. Voroshilov proclaimed the slogan that the Red Army would wage war "with little blood and on foreign territory." But this statement did not prevent the approval of the next year’s plan of evacuation from areas that may be occupied by the enemy, and the next norms of losses for the year of the war, which had very little in common with the mentioned slogan. Therefore, when analyzing preparations for war, it is very important to separate political propaganda from the real direction of military planning.
      © Melia
      The doctrine of the USSR was a "starvation strategy" - the future big war will be long, the winner in it is the one who evacuates and mobilizes industry in the best way. Hence the evacoplanes, and the "second sites", and the Third Five-Year Plan with its organized transfer of industry to the east.
      Quote: OloxDbahax
      Instead, the Headquarters had to issue a directive - "cut off the wedge and dig in."

      It was with this order that the NGSH came to KOVO. But the RKKA-41 was famous for its creative approach to the execution of orders, up to and including non-execution. So as soon as the GKZh left the KOVO headquarters, the command immediately canceled the order to collect all the district's MKs and strike at the base of the 1 TGr wedge. And the MK began to set new tasks, reassigning them and arranging crazy marches. As a result, two days were lost, and when the blow was struck, it was met not by weak flank barriers and rear of the TGr, but by the approaching and entrenched German infantry. And they had to strike with practically naked tanks, for the MK stratified on the march, and there was no longer time to gather.
      1. AsmyppoL
        AsmyppoL 10 June 2021 12: 03
        +11
        The directive for a counterstrike in KOVO was adopted on the afternoon of June 22. It was with this directive that Zhukov flew. The directive was developed on the basis of the General Staff's summary at 10-00 and messages by noon.
        Find there at least a line about the 1st tank group, at the base of which, according to your words, a counterattack by mechanized corps should be applied ...
        Look at a later intelligence report and try to find a tank group at least there ... It's not there either ...
        No one knew where the motorized corps of this group would strike. And Zhukov struck not at the base of the group, but at Lublin.
        And the motorized infantry lagged behind for the reason that no vehicles arrived after mobilization. It took up to three days before the performance. One of the regiments generally moved completely on foot.
        1. AsmyppoL
          AsmyppoL 10 June 2021 15: 54
          +8
          Comrade Zhukov on June 22 could only know what was reported from Kiev and the intelligence department. On the evening of June 21, there were almost no tanks in the places of attacks by enemy motorized corps (except for one extended tank division, which was not there).

          The directive is described in detail in Baghramyan's memoirs:
          "... Looking now at our first reconnaissance and operational reports, I am bitterly convinced that they were far from reflecting all the enormous danger that threatened the troops of the northern flank of our front. What, for example, information about the enemy advancing on our 5th Army, were our front-line breeders able to report?

          They noted that one infantry division was advancing in the area of ​​Lyuboml, one infantry and one tank was advancing in the direction of Vladimir-Volynsky, and two more German infantry divisions south of the border with the 6th Army,

          It turned out that in the entire strip of the army, only five divisions enemy. Considering that we had four rifle divisions not far from the border, the situation, naturally, did not seem so threatening. This was the basis for the directive we received.


          After all, neither the People's Commissar nor the Chief of the General Staff knew that a German motorized corps had rushed from Sokal to Radzekhuv across the area free of our troops, and that a similar corps was trying to break through from Ustilug to Lutsk. When we more realistically assessed the threat to the right flank of our front, our reports, which did not reflect the full severity of the threat, were already in Moscow ... "
      2. Konnick
        Konnick 10 June 2021 15: 03
        +9
        As a result, two days were lost, and when the blow was struck, it was met not by weak flank barriers and rear of the TGr, but by the approaching and entrenched German infantry. And they had to strike with practically naked tanks, for the MK stratified on the march, and there was no longer time to gather.

        The commissar of the 8th mechanized corps Poppel, whom he disliked and considered mediocre Zhukov, wrote well about this. And Poppel, commanding half of the corps, better than Zhukov's friend Ryabyshev, was able to fight in those conditions and led his group out of the encirclement. Ryabyshev, however, did not show himself during the Second World War, although Zhukov praised him. Memoirs "In a difficult time", and on the site "Memory of the People" published a journal of military operations of Poppel's group, entertaining reading.
    4. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 10 June 2021 12: 55
      +8
      Have you ever read this directive?
  3. Free wind
    Free wind 10 June 2021 05: 09
    +8
    I remember even political activists in the USSR, they did not carry such savagery.
  4. Far B
    Far B 10 June 2021 05: 13
    +19
    Here is a burn of a Christmas tree-stick, again twenty-five! Why didn't he believe ?! (Although in relation to the head of state, the word "faith" looks extremely stupid. Rather, the word "assumed" is applicable). Why such nonsense, if a directive was sent out to the troops, staff games were held, etc., and so on? Another thing is that Stalin did not know - and could not know the exact date, too many options were offered to him. So I fully assumed that there would be an attack. And you can believe or not believe in Russell's teapot. Or Santa Claus. Kindergarten of some kind.
    1. SERGE ANT
      SERGE ANT 10 June 2021 05: 32
      +12
      You don't even know how to comment on such articles, but you did it))
    2. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 10 June 2021 14: 32
      +2
      I completely agree! What do you mean did not believe? All actions say they were preparing. There were samples. China. Spain. Finnish. (the same author had a wonderful article in 2013 ---Stalin falcons in ChinaLong before the war, they identified shortcomings, tried to fix them. Well, yes! Nobody knew the exact date; reports from different services were contradictory.
      The Russian philosopher Zinoviev, who fought, was awarded and then repressed, wrote that 5 days before the attack, they were given dry rations and everything else.
      And the evacuation? That's for sure ---- Stalin knew everything. Plans for the evacuation of factories, equipment, personnel, supply of materials in the rear! And everything worked.
      Quote: Far In
      Here is a burn of a Christmas tree-stick, again twenty-five! Why didn't he believe ?! (Although in relation to the head of state, the word "faith" looks extremely stupid. Rather, the word "assumed" is applicable). Why such nonsense, if a directive was sent out to the troops, staff games were held, etc., and so on? Another thing is that Stalin did not know - and could not know the exact date, too many options were offered to him. So I fully assumed that there would be an attack. And you can believe or not believe in Russell's teapot. Or Santa Claus. Kindergarten of some kind.
    3. Konnick
      Konnick 10 June 2021 15: 13
      +3
      Here is a burn of a Christmas tree-stick, again twenty-five! Why didn't he believe ?! (Although in relation to the head of state, the word "faith" looks extremely stupid. Rather, the word "assumed" is applicable). Why such nonsense, if a directive was sent to the troops, staff games were held, etc., and so on? Another thing is that Stalin did not know - and could not know the exact date, too many options were offered to him. So I fully assumed that there would be an attack. And you can believe or not believe in Russell's teapot. Or Santa Claus. Kindergarten of some kind


      For example, the garrison in the Brest fortress was taken by surprise, and the commander of the 67th rifle division, Dedayev, led the troops on June 21 from the barracks to the defensive lines, and German planes bombed the empty barracks in Libau. It is a pity that S.S. Smirnov did not manage to write a book about the heroic defense of Libava, he was going to write it after the "Brest Fortress". Strange, for some it was a surprise attack, but for some it was not. It is a pity that General N.A. Dedaev died three days after the start of the war, he was a very smart and courageous general, only our memoirists-commanders did not remember him, apparently they were ashamed of June 22.
  5. Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 10 June 2021 05: 18
    -6
    The pre-war repressions against the senior command personnel, Stalin's cowardice to give Hitler a reason to start a war, therefore it was forbidden to occupy the foreground with field and Urovsky units, for these miscalculations of the bandit Stalin, the Soviet people paid dearly with their lives.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 05: 23
      +5
      Quote: Pessimist22
      for these miscalculations of the bandit Stalin, the Soviet people paid dearly with their lives.
      Blunt stamp on blunt stamp. I also forgot about the Victory "in spite of" the bandit Stalin, so what?
      1. Pessimist22
        Pessimist22 10 June 2021 05: 30
        -6
        You can put a portrait of Dzhugashvili in a corner and pray for him, but I consider him a bandit, I have the right to express my opinion, while I still have ...
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 05: 34
          +3
          Quote: Pessimist22
          You can put a portrait of Dzhugashvili in a corner and pray for him, but I consider him a bandit, I have the right to express my opinion, while I still have ...
          Well, go to Europe, there this point of view will only be applauded that you are suffering here.
          1. Pessimist22
            Pessimist22 10 June 2021 05: 55
            -2
            That is, in your opinion, if a person has a different point of view, then he is wrong and should go to Europe? Well, it's good that they won't jail me for this and shoot me, while I hope.
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 06: 00
              +2
              Quote: Pessimist22
              That is, in your opinion, if a person has a different point of view, then he is wrong and should go to Europe?

              Well stay here and suffer. Only remove the banner of Victory from your avatar, for without Stalin there would be no Victory.
              1. Pessimist22
                Pessimist22 10 June 2021 06: 16
                +2
                If you don’t tell me what to do, I won’t tell you where you need to go. smile
          2. Pessimist22
            Pessimist22 10 June 2021 06: 18
            -5
            I understand that you want to do everything, like non-brothers, who do not agree with your point of view to plant or kill, instead of Bandera you will wear Stalin, I can imagine what kind of intelligence you have, I think that you are an old, sick and not very smart person.
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 06: 27
              +4
              Quote: Pessimist22
              I understand that you want, like non-brothers, to do everything that does not agree with your point of view to plant or kill,
              So far, about the mind, only you open up and even fantasies, very unhealthy.

              Quote: Pessimist22
              Greetings colleague! I forgot to say that the Nazis, the most zealous to hang, and the rest to hard labor
              Not bad, not bad. For example, I did not write anything about executions and embarkations.



              Quote: Pessimist22
              If you don’t tell me what to do, I won’t tell you where you need to go.
              Those. to sculpt the banner of Victory on an avatar and at the same time to pour mud on the Supreme for you is no contradiction. What did you write about a sick person?
              1. Pessimist22
                Pessimist22 10 June 2021 06: 55
                -8
                By the way, it was your "genius" Stalin who annexed the regions with the Natsiks to Ukraine, which later played a role in breaking away from Russia, he did not shoot but pardoned the Natsiks, whose descendants are doing lawlessness in Ukraine, against the Russian people, these are the fruits of your Stalin.
                1. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 07: 05
                  +3
                  Quote: Pessimist22
                  with the Natsiks to Ukraine, who later played a role in breaking away from Russia, he did not shoot, but pardoned the Natsiks

                  And in my opinion, people like you played the main role in the death of the USSR, by the way, executions and hard labor are lovely for you, that for the Nazis, but for some reason Stalin is not, neither you nor the Nazis are strange.
                  1. Pessimist22
                    Pessimist22 10 June 2021 07: 11
                    -5
                    Stalin is only fond of gangster methods of management, being is consciousness, if Dzhugashvili was brought up and lived for many years in a gangster environment, he could not become another, only a bandit.
                    1. Vladimir_2U
                      Vladimir_2U 10 June 2021 07: 26
                      +3
                      Quote: Pessimist22
                      Stalin is only fond of gangster methods of management

                      So far ?! Stalin is not letting you go. laughing

                      Quote: Pessimist22
                      being is consciousness, if Dzhugashvili was brought up and lived for many years in a bandit environment, he could not become another, only a bandit.
                      After reading your comments, your environment appears to me to be somewhat, mmm, unhealthy ..
                2. tatra
                  tatra 10 June 2021 07: 37
                  -11%
                  AGAIN the enemies of the communists cowardly dump the blame on the communists for what you have done YOURSELF.
      2. novel66
        novel66 10 June 2021 07: 30
        +3
        I also forgot the "genius" Zhukov, who taught Stalin throughout the war ... what turned out after 53 years
    2. magdama
      magdama 10 June 2021 05: 30
      +7
      "Repression". Stalin was destroying the "fifth column", to which now, apparently, you belong. If it were not for the "bandit" Stalin, but, for example, the "All-Union headman" Kalinin or such as Khrushchev or Gorbachev, nothing would have remained of the USSR. Pray for the great Stalin, you stupid person!
      1. Pessimist22
        Pessimist22 10 June 2021 05: 50
        -2
        Tell me what is left of the USSR? I know that the communists have become capitalists, and the free workers and peasants of the USSR have become their powerless slaves, correct if I was mistaken.
        1. tatra
          tatra 10 June 2021 07: 40
          -9
          Name at least one communist from those who got their big and huge incomes and salaries after the destruction of the USSR. The members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union who, together with you, the enemies of the communists, have raged against the communists since Perestroika, are NOT "enlightened" in Perestroika, namely, a communist by convictions.
          1. Pessimist22
            Pessimist22 10 June 2021 07: 58
            +2
            Take the oligarchs or ministers and the president, they are 99% communists or Komsomol members.
            1. tatra
              tatra 10 June 2021 08: 10
              -9
              NO, the communists are those who, unlike the enemies of the communists, do not pretend to be those who are beneficial to you at the moment. Name at least one member of the CPSU from those enriched after the destruction of the USSR, who would still call himself a communist.
              1. 2 Level Advisor
                2 Level Advisor 10 June 2021 08: 59
                +1
                it's not difficult - look at the composition of the Communist Party, there are enough of them, who else was in the CPSU ..
                1. tatra
                  tatra 10 June 2021 09: 07
                  -9
                  What does the Communist Party of the Russian Federation have to do with it? It's about the 30-year-old cowardly ideology of the enemies of the communists "and we have nothing to do with it, it's all the communists are to blame." It is in their ideology that the communists staged Perestroika with counter-revolution in order to become rich and richest people, and the enemies of the communists themselves cowardly "have nothing to do" with responsibility for their seizure of the USSR, and the fact that they became the richest and richest people-in comparison with the people in their states on the territory of the former USSR.
              2. Squelcher
                Squelcher 10 June 2021 20: 05
                +5
                - The head of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Gennady Zyuganov earned last year - 6 million 539 thousand; spouse - 184 thousand (the highest income among the leaders of the factions).

                - The first vice - speaker of the lower chamber from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Ivan Melnikov, earned 5,33 million rubles.

                - Alexander Nekrasov, deputy of the State Duma, Communist Party of the Russian Federation. Personal income 424 million 792 thousand

                - Sergei Muravlenko, State Duma deputy, Communist Party. Personal income (rubles) 401 million 986 thousand. Income of spouse and children 24 million 434014 rubles.
      2. Olgovich
        Olgovich 10 June 2021 08: 07
        0
        Quote: magdama
        Stalin destroyed the "fifth column"

        Yes Yes:
        the main executions of "enemies", and these are hundreds of thousands of people in the period 08.37-08.38, were carried out by the People's Commissar of the NKVD of the USSR N. Yezhov (companions) - an alcoholic, passive and active homosexual, a psychopath, recognized by a Soviet court as a spy, traitor, conspirator, pest and saboteur
    3. strannik1985
      strannik1985 10 June 2021 06: 52
      +8
      Pre-war repression

      Suppose the foreground was occupied by "field and Urovsky units", right from the summer of 1940, as it should be at the front in a war - one and a half hundred divisions in one echelon. What will they do during the year?
      1. novel66
        novel66 10 June 2021 07: 31
        0
        this, sorry, mobilization and automatic declaration of war in the role of the aggressor
        1. strannik1985
          strannik1985 10 June 2021 08: 42
          +6
          Not necessarily, they could not demobilize the army after the Soviet-Finnish war, for example, on June 1, there were 163 rifle divisions in the Red Army, of which 3 - 14 thousand, 15 - 12 550, 83 - 12 thousand, 3 - 9 thousand, 43 - 6 thousand more than a hundred divisions will be enough for the first echelon of the fronts, the rest for the Far East and in the internal districts.
        2. Olgovich
          Olgovich 10 June 2021 14: 29
          -2
          Quote: novel xnumx
          this, sorry, mobilization and automatic declaration of war in the role of the aggressor

          the aggressor has ALREADY been recognized as Hitler by the whole world.

          The aggressor against the aggressor is called differently, and no one recognized the occupied Poland by Germany, so it would be "the liberation of Poland", not aggression.

          In 1944, when she was liberated, after all, no one called the USSR an aggressor ...
          1. novel66
            novel66 10 June 2021 14: 30
            +1
            now called
    4. tatra
      tatra 10 June 2021 07: 34
      -11%
      Enemies of the communists to justify the capture of the USSR, have created a bunch of anti-Soviet myths, including the fact that ALL repressed for political reasons in the USSR were "innocent victims, the best, most hard-working." Here, without the slightest proof, you created a myth that by "cleansing" the army in the late 30s, Stalin "beheaded" the army, and removed exactly those who could easily defeat the Hitlerite coalition that attacked the USSR. And cowardice is just one of the main qualities of Stalinophobes.
  6. nikvic46
    nikvic46 10 June 2021 05: 41
    +3
    "Our cause is just, the enemy will be defeated." These are not just words. This is a reminder to all those with imperial sentiments, the myth of a fleeting war will remain a myth.
  7. G17
    G17 10 June 2021 05: 52
    +2
    The article is very interesting. But I disagree with the author on one thing - Stalin knew that the war would be in 1941. Hess's flight to England in May 1941 and the suspicious silence of the British about negotiations with him made it possible to draw such a conclusion. This time. Second, it was extremely important which side the neutral United States with its enormous economic potential would take. The American elite openly said that they would help Hitler if the USSR attacked Germany or let himself be provoked... That is why Stalin was forced to grant the right of the first blow to Hitler, in order to help the United States make the choice necessary for the USSR. And third (as the author mentions), on the eve of the war, a command was given to bring all the troops into combat readiness, which in the Western Military District of General Pavlov was safely shelved, which resulted in a catastrophe (for which Pavlov justly received a death sentence). So there was no surprise, no hopes of delaying the conflict until 1942, the Kremlin also did not harbor. But, of course, they did not expect such monstrous defeats and betrayal / incompetence of the Soviet generals, as a result of which the Germans approached the outskirts of Moscow.
    1. Fat
      Fat 10 June 2021 06: 52
      +7
      The article is certainly interesting ...
      Because popular literature is.
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 10 June 2021 07: 12
        +2
        There was no freedom of speech in the USSR. But the author wrote this correctly.
        1. novel66
          novel66 10 June 2021 07: 32
          -5
          but is it needed?
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 10 June 2021 08: 06
            0
            Of course not Roman. Why is she. We need the faithful and non-judgmental.
            1. novel66
              novel66 10 June 2021 08: 25
              -4
              those. that's completely uncensored - make whatever you want
          2. Olgovich
            Olgovich 10 June 2021 14: 41
            -1
            Quote: novel xnumx
            but is it needed?

            Is it possible that some kind of galosh mediocrity Suslov should determine - that we correctly know, read, watch?

            Why on earth? Why is he better than us? request
        2. tatra
          tatra 10 June 2021 07: 43
          -13%
          More precisely, in the USSR there was no freedom for the enemies of the communists to instill anger and hatred, to lie, slander, be rude, insult, humiliate the people. After all, this is precisely what your "freedom of speech", the enemies of the communists, consists of since your Perestroika.
          1. smaug78
            smaug78 10 June 2021 09: 42
            -5
            Madam, have you stopped drinking cognac in the morning? Yes or no?
            1. tatra
              tatra 10 June 2021 09: 48
              -8
              How tired of the rudeness of the enemies of the communists, with whom they climb to discuss the history of their country and people. If there is nothing to refute my words, do not torture Claudia.
              1. smaug78
                smaug78 10 June 2021 11: 08
                -10%
                How tired of the rudeness of "pseudo-levies", carrying drunken delirium in the morning.
            2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 17: 36
              -5
              Quote: smaug78
              Madam, have you stopped drinking cognac in the morning? Yes or no?

              Be careful .....
              1. smaug78
                smaug78 10 June 2021 20: 11
                -11%
                Thanks for the warning! True, it seems to me that she already has an arrow in the red zone of the tachometer.
        3. Fat
          Fat 10 June 2021 08: 46
          +1
          I do not argue that the article is correct. But the impression is that Stalin and Hitler played chess with black and white figures, like Korchnoi and Karpov in distant Baguio. That's why it's sad ...
        4. tihonmarine
          tihonmarine 10 June 2021 10: 08
          +1
          Quote: kalibr
          There was no freedom of speech in the USSR. But the author wrote this correctly.

          And that was probably for the best. The people do not need to know about everything. The people understand "freedom of speech" as permissiveness. Although everyone has their own opinion on this.
      2. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 10 June 2021 10: 11
        +3
        Quote: Thick
        The article is certainly interesting ...
        Because popular literature is.

        In a small article, I tried to cram everything about which whole volumes have been written for 70 years.
    2. Shiden
      Shiden 10 June 2021 07: 52
      +2
      I want you to slightly correct the German invasion of the Balkans gave Stalin a reason to doubt that Hitler would attack in 41. And only the flight of Hess dispelled Stalin's last illusions. You can argue with your second point in the USA, there were many supporters of isociolism. Roosevelt with great difficulty managed to push through the Lend Lease law, and then thanks to the loot of big business.
  8. ee2100
    ee2100 10 June 2021 07: 25
    +9
    You can endlessly watch how the fire burns, how the water flows and endlessly talk about the reasons for the creation of the Red Army at the initial period of the Second World War.
  9. north 2
    north 2 10 June 2021 07: 45
    +1
    First.
    After the First World War, Soviet Russia and Germany found themselves in isolation: one because of the revolution and the separate Brest Peace, the other because the Treaty of Versailles placed it in such conditions. Therefore, the cooperation between Soviet Russia and Hitlerite Germany in the thirties can be regarded as cooperation of the isolated. But in Russia there was also the Civil War, and neither the fronts of the Civil War, nor the fronts of the First World War went through Germany. Therefore, it was easier to restore industry after Hitler spat on the terms of the Versailles Treaty of Germany. And to restore it was on the foundation of what, since the legacy of the industry of Kaiser Germany was better, more powerful and more modern than the legacy of the industry and communications of Romanov Russia.
    Second.
    At the end of the war, Hitler envied Stalin that before the Second World War he destroyed many of the highest commanders of the Red Army and in the Red Army, before the generals during the Second World War, those who started the war became captains and majors. And under Stalin during the Second World War, stars on shoulder straps were not given for nothing and the Maoirs were not given command of divisions for their beautiful eyes. Here are the old and snickering field marshals of Hitler and lost the war. So I have not yet written here that before the Second World War, removing Blucher with Tukhachevsky, etc., Stalin predicted that Hitler would not even look for Stauffenberg and others like him. And he and others like him were in the Wehrmacht, like Blucher and others like him were in the Red Army. And if Stalin before the Second World War had not cleared the USSR of the fifth column, then the policemen and Vlasovites during the Second World War in the USSR would have been several million more.
  10. Olgovich
    Olgovich 10 June 2021 07: 49
    +3
    Thus, it was reasonable that Germany would not go to war with Russia until the problem of England was solved. The deployment of German divisions on the border with the USSR could be easily explained. Berlin could have feared a surprise blow from the Russians while they dealt with England. It is logical to prepare a powerful barrier in the East


    Yeah, a whole YEAR, when all the main forces of Germany were concentrated in the West in a campaign against France, then they were NOT afraid to the south of Europe, and in May 41, after the defeat of France, they were "afraid" lol
    With these facts before his eyes, the rationalist Stalin did not believe in Hitler's attack in the spring and summer of 1941.

    He believed in his forecasts of the development of a protracted World War in the West and in the fact that he would control the situation: Stalin to Dimitrov, 1939:
    “The war is between two groups of capitalist countries. We are not averse to fighting them well and weakening each other. It is not bad if the position of the richest capitalist countries (especially England) was shaken by the hands of Germany. Hitler, himself not realizing this and unwilling, is shaking and undermining the capitalist system. We can maneuver, push one side against the other, to get torn better. .
    .

    He did not learn the deadly object lesson of WWI, which showed that a protracted war in the West could be only with the existence of the Eastern Front, otherwise France will face a lightning defeat. By the way, this was shown by the not so distant Franco-Prussian war.

    In addition, the mistake was the fear that carrying out mobilization and bringing the troops to full combat readiness would "provoke" the outbreak of war: Hitler simply could not physically attack before June 22, tk. decided the issue of the security of his southern flank in the Balkans, and attacked when he was decided and freed the troops and no longer even bothering to find a reason for war. It is impossible, having on the contrary on the border a mobilized huge fighting army, to stand against it with troops and orders of peace - this is what provokes the aggressor.

    And this statement
    Moscow, just before the start of the war, brought the armed forces to full combat readiness
    does not correspond to reality - the defeat and confusion of the first days, the author himself showed at the beginning of the article.

    Only in the year 08.37-08.38 681 thousand citizens of the country, mostly men, mostly of draft age, were shot. This is the loss of several combined-arms armies in the country, which by 1941 had not yet recovered from the terrible losses of the Civil War and the famine of 1932-33.
    It was about the steel will of the Soviet leader that the German blitzkrieg broke.


    About the steel will of all the people of the country, who stood up to defend the Fatherland, the blitzkrieg broke
    1. tatra
      tatra 10 June 2021 09: 16
      -13%
      The communists and the Chekists have failed. As soon as the Hitlerite coalition attacked the USSR and the Soviet people, MILLIONS of you, enemies of the Communists, ran to grovel before Hitler and the Nazis, together with them they killed 27 million Soviet citizens.
      And naturally, as always, the enemies of the communists both justify their crimes and cowardly blame the communists for their crimes. You justify your collaboration both in Civil War and in the Great Patriotic War by the fact that you, you see, did not like the government.
      1. Squelcher
        Squelcher 10 June 2021 20: 37
        +7
        Your categoricalness to the brink of ignorance is simply touching. Hereditary nobleman Dmitry Mikhailovich Karbyshev preferred death to betrayal, in contrast to the old peasant proletarian Vlasov
        1. ccsr
          ccsr 13 June 2021 10: 33
          -9
          Quote: Squelcher
          Your categoricalness to the brink of ignorance is simply touching.

          Your ignorance also surprises with its spontaneity, because in the intelligence structures of the Wehrmacht, thousands of Russian nobles trained saboteurs, worked as translators in radio intelligence units, carried out intelligence missions themselves, penetrating into the territory of the USSR. So Karbyshev alone and Vlasov alone cannot draw the overall picture, and your example is too far from understanding which classes of Russian people were more fighting on Hitler's side.
          1. Squelcher
            Squelcher 13 June 2021 14: 00
            +5
            Firstly, I did not raise the issue of quantity. Secondly:
            Do you always ascribe words to people that they did not say in order to assert themselves and feel right? Or to make it beautiful for the sake of ideology? The war was Patriotic deaths and communists and non-party people, and there were heroes and traitors were from the communists and non-party people.
            Thirdly, RI was dying in the agony of civil war for 5 years. And how many years did they fight and what communists for the USSR after its collapse?
            1. ccsr
              ccsr 13 June 2021 15: 55
              -6
              Quote: Squelcher
              Do you always ascribe words to people that they did not say in order to assert themselves and feel right?

              I really want you to see it.
              Quote: Squelcher
              Or to make it beautiful for the sake of ideology?

              No, not because of ideology, but because people like you use cheap manipulations when it comes to the general picture of those years.
              Quote: Squelcher
              The war was a Patriotic death, both communists and non-party people, and there were heroes and traitors were from the communists and non-party people.

              Then why are you opposing Karbyshev to Vlasov? For what purpose other than ideological?
              Quote: Squelcher
              Thirdly, RI was dying in the agony of civil war for 5 years.

              And what follows from this? It was a common tragedy for our people, regardless of which side they were on during the Civil War.
              Quote: Squelcher
              And how many years did they fight and what communists for the USSR after its collapse?

              The communists did one great deed - they surrendered power without the Civil War and the massacre of their people. But in the Russian Empire, the elite surrendered not only the tsar, but also arranged a bloodbath for those who at least somehow wanted to stop the disintegration of the state, i.e. VKP (b) headed by Lenin.
              1. Squelcher
                Squelcher 13 June 2021 20: 44
                +5
                It's amazing how easily supporters of communism discredit their ideas by ignorance of elementary things.
                Have you mastered at least one composition of Lenin?
                What did he write about the state? An entertaining booklet.
                "State and revolution. The doctrine of Marxism about the state and the tasks of the proletariat in the revolution" in 1918, written by VI Lenin. Read for general development. You can understand why the civil war in Russia lasted so long.

                Like me? Well, whoever is not with you is against you. I understand the class struggle.

                Even for the sake of ideology, you are trying to justify the betrayal of ideals, yeah.
                1. ccsr
                  ccsr 14 June 2021 09: 33
                  -7
                  Quote: Squelcher
                  You have mastered at least one composition of Lenin

                  In fact, I graduated from a Soviet university, and there they taught political science in a way that you never dreamed of, judging by the demagogy that comes from you.
                  Quote: Squelcher
                  You can understand why the civil war in Russia lasted so long.

                  Well, since you are so advanced, then try to at least explain in your own words why, and then people will understand how much you are in the subject.
                  Quote: Squelcher
                  Like me? Well, whoever is not with you is against you. I understand the class struggle

                  Nifiga you do not understand, tk. your life experience is not the one to assess what happened to the country in the twentieth century.
                  Quote: Squelcher
                  Even for the sake of ideology, you are trying to justify the betrayal of ideals, yeah.

                  This is unlikely, because I pointed out your rigging when comparing Karbyshev and Vlasov. And this is thimble-making in relation to our history.
                  1. Squelcher
                    Squelcher 14 June 2021 10: 37
                    +6
                    Graduating from a university was not surprising. Not to get knowledge, but to get a diploma.
                    Explain what to you? Simple Truths? That Violence and Murder Lead to Counteraction? That the definition of the qualities (enemy is not an enemy) of a person by origin (nobles, proletarians, peasants, intellectuals) is stupidity? (this is to the question of Karbyshev and many others who served Russia). The fact that communists can throw mud at the history of Ingushetia, but inconvenient facts about the time of the communist rule are taboo? The point is that the communists often falsified historical facts for the sake of propaganda, and then they wonder why people do not believe you and do not follow you.
                    1. ccsr
                      ccsr 14 June 2021 10: 49
                      -5
                      Quote: Squelcher
                      Explain what to you? Simple truths?

                      Do not hesitate, try to explain, since you know them.
                      Quote: Squelcher
                      What violence and murder leads to opposition? That the definition of the qualities (enemy is not an enemy) of a person by origin (nobles, proletarians, peasants, intellectuals) is stupidity?

                      It is stupidity in this case to approach the assessment of the events of a century ago with the current morality, and not understand why there was a split in Russian society that led to the tragedy of our state.
                      Quote: Squelcher
                      The fact that it is possible to throw mud at the history of the RI communists,

                      Nobody poured it - do not become in a position offended by this, because in general they tried not to rewrite history, as is done now in relation to the CPSU (b).
                      Quote: Squelcher
                      The point is that the communists often falsified historical facts for the sake of propaganda, and then they wonder why people do not believe you and do not follow you.

                      The point is that you yourself are a propagandist, only fixated on anti-Sovietism and nothing more. By the way, I am not a member of any party, but the ideas of the communists are clear to me and I believe that they are more progressive for our country than the principles of wild capitalism imposed by the authorities. I am not calling anyone to follow me - I just have such experience behind me that I understand a lot that is happening in our country, and it does not make me happy.
                      1. Squelcher
                        Squelcher 14 June 2021 12: 58
                        +5
                        Yes, you do not belong to the party, but breastfeed, we defended the propaganda-nonsense :).
                        Unlike you, I treat Russia as a state with 1100 years of history. And the Soviet period of 70 years, one of the historical moments that has passed.

                        Rewriting history is ridiculous, do you believe what you said? A small example:
                        Trotsky and Lenin made a revolution, and bam Trotsky is the enemy, Stalin was building the USSR and bam it from the mausoleum quietly re-synchronized, and even the cult of the personality was denounced and so on, at least you don’t lie to yourself ..

                        Read the book first, what did Lenin write?

                        About life experience, everyone has different, someone sat in one place and drank beer in the evening after work, happy that his children are being raised by school, he has his own experience, someone in the country and the world traveled around setting up production, someone ran around the garrisons, someone taught political literacy yourself in it not believing, what is yours?
                      2. ccsr
                        ccsr 14 June 2021 16: 38
                        -7
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        Yes, you really do not belong to the party, but breastfeed, we defended the propaganda-nonsense :)

                        Do you not admit that people can think sanely, without any propaganda design?
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        Unlike you, I treat Russia as a state with 1100 years of history.

                        I have never renounced our history and I respect it. By the way, Slavic tribes appeared on the territory of Russia for a long time in 1100 years - do you not consider them our ancestors only on the basis that they did not have a single government and a common religion? Educate yourself:
                        At the end of the XlX century in the Tiflis church museum was found the manuscript "The Siege of Constantinople by the Russians in 626 and the campaign of Heraclius to Persia." It was extracted from a Georgian parchment manuscript, presumably written in 1042 by the church leader Georgy Mtatsmindeli.
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        Trotsky and Lenin made a revolution, and bam Trotsky is the enemy, Stalin was building the USSR and bam it from the mausoleum was quietly re-synchronized, and even the cult of the personality was denounced and so on, at least don't lie to yourself

                        This is a common internal party struggle, as in the same States, where elections were directly rigged. In what way for you, studying, as it seems to you, history, these events contradict the same murder of monarchs in pre-revolutionary times?
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        About life experience, everyone has different, someone sat in one place and drank beer in the evening after work, happy that his children are being raised by school, he has his own experience, someone in the country and the world traveled around setting up production, someone ran around the garrisons, someone taught political literacy yourself in it not believing, what is yours?

                        26 years of service in the army and then another 25 years in small business is enough to understand that you are talking nonsense when you begin to teach how the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks was obliged to build the USSR. Yes, and in your current life, you have too odious ideas.
                      3. Squelcher
                        Squelcher 14 June 2021 18: 49
                        +5
                        To equate election fraud and physical elimination of competitors is the height of sanity. Is it reasonable for you to deny the obvious for the sake of an ideological picture?
                        Unfortunately, you defend Achinea (look at your first post), and you are also engaged in postscripts.
                        Well, read Lenin V.I., otherwise the communists without theory throwing slogans are simply ridiculous.
                        By the way, are you for communism or socialism?


                        I study the history of Russia with pleasure, thanks to this, this is an interesting fact, very informative.
                      4. ccsr
                        ccsr 15 June 2021 11: 08
                        -6
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        To equate election fraud and physical elimination of competitors is the height of sanity.

                        You are clearly not in the subject - in the United States, already elected presidents are being killed or assassinated, but here you remembered something about Stalin's time. Apparently you do not know the history of Russia and how some of our monarchs died.

                        Quote: Squelcher
                        Well, read Lenin V.I., otherwise the communists without theory throwing slogans are simply ridiculous.

                        I read it for a long time, so don't worry about it. Some of the postulates of Marxism turned out to be incorrect for modern conditions, but the teaching itself is not refuted by today's life.
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        By the way, are you for communism or socialism?

                        In general, the main goal of socialism is not only to create a material and technical base, but most importantly to educate a new person - usually all demagogues do not remember this when they oppose socialism to communism. But how much we will be able to change the worldview of a new person, and whether he wants to live under communism, I do not know, and therefore I cannot decide for him how he wants life. We would have to build a socially just state, and only then think about how we will live on. And the future choice will be left to the descendants - we live under capitalism, not under socialism.
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        I study the history of Russia with pleasure, thanks to this, this is an interesting fact, very informative.

                        I think that any literate person who studies our history will understand that the idea of ​​social equality was born long before the Great October Revolution, so do not bury socialism ahead of time.
                      5. Squelcher
                        Squelcher 15 June 2021 12: 22
                        +6
                        I am not going to chronicle social equality, but you can reach the goal by different methods and speed. It is possible through revolution and violence and destruction and corpses quickly. Or it is possible through persistent and long work - political, organizational, educational.
                        It's all about the methods, and when I see posts with nonsense like- "In order for the world to become a better-It is necessary that good people take weapons and shoot all the bad ones while they sleep with children and wives", or idiocy "Who is not with us , he is against us ", no matter who it sounds from - a communist, socialist or liberal, I think and will consider it idiocy.
                        All the best.
                      6. ccsr
                        ccsr 15 June 2021 12: 31
                        -6
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        Or it is possible through persistent and long work - political, organizational, educational.

                        I am in favor of this path - there are too few of us left to experiment with revolutions, and every year there are more and more people who want to devour us. That is why all thoughts are about that. to survive.
                        Quote: Squelcher
                        All the best.

                        Same to you. By the way, I don't run around with the slogans you cited - I already see life differently.
  • Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 09: 53
    +2
    Quote: Olgovich
    He believed in his forecasts of the development of the protracted World War in the West and in the fact that he would control the situation.

    That's right - he, apparently, was preparing for an analogue of the First World War - kilometers of trenches in front of the Maginot Line, spitting with large caliber, corpses of poilulet and zoldat on a thorn, dog dumps in the sky, mutual resource depletion, etc. And then come to war, like the States in 1917, and support one of the half-dead opponents. Win, arrange a second Versailles / Trianon and give out their "14 points" for rebuilding Europe in their favor. The plan, no words, is brilliant. True, the German generals of Comrade Stalin let down. And he himself, with his rather mediocre Finnish adventure, gave the Fuehrer a reason to sneer about "feet of clay".
    1. Olgovich
      Olgovich 10 June 2021 11: 21
      -4
      Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      That's right - he, apparently, was preparing for an analogue of the First World War - kilometers of trenches in front of the Maginot Line, spitting with a large caliber, corpses of poilu and zoldat on a thorn, dog dumps in the sky, mutual resource depletion, etc.

      Apparently I forgot that everything in a month after the start of WWI, the Germans were near Paris, whose fate hung in the balance - and this is in the presence of a huge Eastern front in Germany!

      What would have been the fate of Paris / France in the presence of several more corps from the East, it is clear.

      France was just as quickly defeated in Franco-Prussian War 1870-71also a good history lesson.
      1. IS-80_RVGK2
        IS-80_RVGK2 10 June 2021 23: 15
        +2
        Quote: Olgovich
        Apparently, he forgot that just a month after the start of WWI, the Germans were near Paris, whose fate hung in the balance - and this was in the presence of a huge Eastern Front in Germany!

        Is this not the Eastern Front where the Landwehr piled on Samsonov? Yes, haberdasher and cardinal is power.
        Quote: Olgovich
        What would have been the fate of Paris / France in the presence of several more corps from the East, it is clear.

        And, that is, it is Stalin's fault that the Poles, the British and the French did everything together so that they could not have any union with the USSR?
        Quote: Olgovich
        Just as quickly, France was defeated in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, which is also a good historical lesson.

        And here Stalin is to blame for the fact that the French managed to step on the same rake three times. That is, the French should not have learned the lessons, only Stalin should have learned them? It is logical.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 11 June 2021 09: 36
          -4
          Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
          This is not the Eastern Front

          The one where, instead of Paris, two army corps and a division were transferred, and where then 40% of the German divisions were.
          Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
          And, that is, it is Stalin's fault that the Poles, the British and the French did everything together so that they could not have any union with the USSR?

          The country of the Comintern with its overthrow of the sovereigns was a little less feared than Hitler, and for good reason: remember "just" the military bases in the Baltic states, which ended in the disappearance of its independence.
          ,
          Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
          And here Stalin is to blame for the fact that the French managed to step on the same rake three times. That is, the French should not have learned the lessons, only Stalin should have learned them? It is logical.

          the French recovered and won the WWI.

          But in Stalin, no: see the catastrophe 41 and losses.
          1. IS-80_RVGK2
            IS-80_RVGK2 11 June 2021 10: 03
            +2
            Quote: Olgovich
            The one where, instead of Paris, two army corps and a division were transferred, and where then 40% of the German divisions were.

            Who would give them the capabilities of the Wehrmacht model 41 years old would have driven the brilliant tsarist army to the Urals? For she could, at the worst, chase some hodgepodge of Austro-Hungarians, but every time she stumbled over the Germans.
            Quote: Olgovich
            The country of the Comintern with its overthrow of the sovereigns was a little less feared than Hitler, and for good reason: remember "just" the military bases in the Baltic states, which ended in the disappearance of its independence.

            And here again Stalin is to blame for the fact that they were not smart enough? And by the way, let's say this is not the France that squeezed Alsace and Lorraine or Poland that snatched its piece from Russia and Czechoslovakia?
            Quote: Olgovich
            the French recovered and won the WWI.

            Oha. With the help of fools on the eastern front as well.
            Quote: Olgovich
            But in Stalin, no: see the catastrophe 41 and losses.

            And what was there in the Second World War, France showed brilliant results?
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 11 June 2021 12: 13
              -2
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              Which give them the capabilities of the Wehrmacht sample 41 years

              The 6-year-old Wehrmacht did not hold a candle to the Kaiser's regular army.
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              And here again Stalin is to blame for the fact that they were not smart enough?

              They feared the USSR a little less than Hitler, and they were not to blame for this.
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              And by the way, let's say this is not the same France that squeezed Alsace and Lorraine

              she reclaimed the province stolen in the 1971 war of conquest
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              Poland, which snatched its piece from Russia and Czechoslovakia?

              Poland did not snatch anything from Russia: the SNK abolished the western borders with a decree on the non-recognition of the partitions of Poland, and he also recognized the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              Oha. With the help of fools on the eastern front as well.

              thanks to the French rescued by them, the "Turks" suffered losses in WWII by an order of magnitude less than in WWII.
              Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
              And what was there in the Second World War, France showed brilliant results?

              Certainly: see their losses and the losses of the USSR.
              1. IS-80_RVGK2
                IS-80_RVGK2 13 June 2021 07: 48
                +2
                Quote: Olgovich
                The 6-year-old Wehrmacht did not hold a candle to the Kaiser's regular army.

                At the same time, it somehow happened that the worthless Wehrmacht defeated the French army, but the magnificent Kazer army did not.
                Quote: Olgovich
                They feared the USSR a little less than Hitler, and they were not to blame for this.

                Ahahaha. Remind me what one of the Russian emperors said there about the attitude of Europe to Russia?
                Quote: Olgovich
                she reclaimed the province stolen in the 1971 war of conquest

                Nobody stole anything.
                Quote: Olgovich
                Poland did not snatch anything from Russia: the SNK abolished the western borders with a decree on the non-recognition of the partitions of Poland, and he also recognized the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR

                Oh how. Are you sure a patriot of Russia? Whose Crimea?
                Quote: Olgovich
                thanks to the French rescued by them, the "Turks" suffered losses in WWII by an order of magnitude less than in WWII.

                The fact is the death of Samsonov's army thanks to this kind of help.
                Quote: Olgovich
                Certainly: see their losses and the losses of the USSR.

                Their losses are the whole country. The losses of the USSR - half of Europe is under our control.
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 13 June 2021 08: 23
                  -5
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  At the same time, it somehow happened that the worthless Wehrmacht defeated the French army, but the magnificent Kazer army did not.

                  no Kaiser, because RUSSIA was on his back: when will you remember, eh?
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  Ohahah... Remind me what one of the Russian emperors said there about the attitude of Europe to Russia?

                  Wow!
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  Nobody stole anything.

                  to school, yes.
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  Oh how. Are you sure a patriot of Russia? Whose Crimea?

                  did not know? Back to school, teach the so-called decrees. sov authorities what the ussr and the bssr are and where do you find out that Crimea is Russia
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  The fact is the death of Samsonov's army thanks to this kind of help.

                  fact is France saved with England, which became cannon main meat PMV, in contrast to WWII, where, thanks to the "wisdom" of the rulers, others have already become.
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  Their losses are the whole country. The losses of the USSR - half of Europe is under our control.

                  Their losses are a whole country, unhappy hundreds of thousands, and the losses of the USSR from 27 to 42 million, a country devastated to the Volga and, as a result, the borders of the 17th century and the Russian cross.
                  1. IS-80_RVGK2
                    IS-80_RVGK2 13 June 2021 08: 57
                    +2
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    no Kaiser, because RUSSIA was on his back: when will you remember, eh?

                    So what? The Wehrmacht was worse. This means that France had to cope on its own, all the more so since the Britash also helped them.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Wow!

                    That is, there is nothing to say to you, an adherent of monarchism?
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    to school, yes.

                    France declared war on Prussia, lost it. As a result, she received an annexation with which she agreed in a peace treaty. Any objections?
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    did not know? Back to school, teach the so-called decrees. sov authorities what the ussr and the bssr are and where do you find out that Crimea is Russia

                    What do some decrees have to do with the seizure of Belarusian and Ukrainian lands? Why would Crimea be Russia? According to your logic, this is Ukraine.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    the fact is that France and England were preserved, which became the main cannon fodder of WWII, in contrast to WWII, where, thanks to the "wisdom" of the rulers, others have already become.

                    Somewhere you have lost your logic. Either France is doing well, now she is cannon fodder. And all this at the same time. And by the way, while Poland was beating up, the Briton and the French girl had time to think and urgently conclude an alliance with the USSR. But they didn't. And they didn't help Poland. That kind of hints.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Their losses are a whole country

                    Well, we also had the opportunity to shamefully surrender. Are you in favor of this variant of events?
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    and the losses of the USSR from 27 to 42 million

                    Write more, why should you feel sorry for these damned scoops. Svanidze and Gozman approve.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    a country ravaged to the Volga, and as a result, the borders of the 17th century and the Russian cross.

                    Remind me - who slept through the scientific and technological revolution, brought his people to the level of cattle, mercilessly exploited them, squandered heaps of money abroad instead of investing in their country? Remind me why by the beginning of the 20th century Russia was barely getting out of feudalism and trying to catch up with Europe in terms of economy and living standards?
                    By the way, what about French demography? Did bloody Stalin reach there too? By the way, there will soon be no cross at such a pace, but a crescent. And the territory of France is now also the 17th century. And I don’t want to remember the small-sized woman. Some tears.
                    1. Olgovich
                      Olgovich 13 June 2021 10: 36
                      -5
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      So what? The Wehrmacht was worse. This means that France had to cope on its own, all the more so since the Britash also helped them.

                      and France was worse, did not know? So find out! Britain helped in both cases.
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      That is, there is nothing to say to you, an adherent of monarchism?

                      you don't understand again? lol
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      France declared war on Prussia, lost it. As a result, she received an annexation with which she agreed in a peace treaty. Any objections?

                      it was Prussia who provoked the war, prepared for it and WANTED war, learn history. Alsace-Lorraine is France, stolen from her by the occupier
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      Somewhere you have lost your logic. Either France is doing well, now she is cannon fodder. And all this at the same time.

                      belay everything turned out well for her, in the end, in WWII, and the main cannon fodder, thanks to her preservation by Russia, they became in WWII
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      And by the way, while Poland was beating up, the Briton and the French girl had time to think and urgently conclude an alliance with the USSR. But they didn't. And they didn't help Poland. That kind of hints.

                      this time was at the USSRto think and urgently conclude an alliance with the West. But he didn't. And they didn't help Poland. What kind of hints
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      What do some decrees have to do with the seizure of Belarusian and Ukrainian lands? Why would Crimea be Russia? According to your logic, this is Ukraine.

                      Don't you remember yourself anymore? You carried something about Russia, and so with Russia, Poland, recognized by the Bolsheviks in 18 g, had neither a common border, nor claims, only to the Bussr.

                      And by a decree of 18, they also CANCELED the partitions of Poland and the western borders of the country: the Poles went to the borders of 1772 on the Dnieper. Now you understand what these iots have done?

                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      Well, we also had the opportunity to shamefully surrender. Are you in favor of this variant of events?

                      there was an opportunity to repeat the PMA situation, and not get it alone for everyone
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      Write more, why should you feel sorry for these damned scoops. Svanidze and Gozman approve.

                      and you count correctly, you are our correct.
                      Why have you lied for decades about losses, who prevented you from telling the truth?
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      Remind me - who slept through the scientific and technological revolution, brought his people to the level of cattle, mercilessly exploited them, squandered heaps of money abroad instead of investing in their country?

                      Bolsheviks, of course: look out the window.
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      Remind me why by the beginning of the 20th century Russia was barely getting out of feudalism and trying to catch up with Europe in terms of economy and living standards?

                      Let me remind you that the Bolsheviks barely caught up with the level of "feudalism" of Russia in 1913 in food and clothing, housing, after incredible sacrifices only after 40 years
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      By the way, what about French demography? T

                      there and a hundred years ago it was so and see Russia then. WHAT did you bring her to?
    2. IS-80_RVGK2
      IS-80_RVGK2 10 June 2021 22: 54
      +1
      I read the comments and I get the impression that only one I do not know what Stalin was thinking.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich 10 June 2021 14: 11
    +9
    Quote: Olgovich
    He believed in his forecasts of the development of a protracted World War in the West.

    More precisely: I did not believe, but hoped that it would be so. From experience. But that was 1939, not 1941.
    Quote: Olgovich
    He did not learn the deadly visual lesson of WWI, which showed that a protracted war in the West can only be with the existence of the Eastern Front, otherwise France will face a lightning defeat

    It was Stalin who learned this lesson, and therefore repeatedly suggested that the "natural allies" create two fronts. I never received consent ... THEY have not learned their lesson.
    Quote: Olgovich
    the mistake was the fear that mobilization and bringing the troops to full combat readiness would "provoke" the outbreak of war

    Now, it's easy to be smart with an afterthought.
  • Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 10 June 2021 08: 13
    +9
    Quote: OloxDbahax
    Stalin knew that there would be a clash with the Wehrmacht.
    But he was "blinded" by the might of the Red Army. The first doctrine was then - "we will beat the enemy on his territory."

    As they wrote in the article, Stalin was neither a fool nor a blind man.

    Finland showed the power of the Red Army a year earlier. Catastrophic gaps were found in many sectors.

    What experience did the Red Army have in 1941? Khalkhin Gol, Finland ... And that's it. The experience of the civil war with its dashing cavalry attacks in the conditions of modern warfare was practically not applicable.

    New models of weapons came to the army that no one really knew how to use ... Not to mention the fact that the samples were "raw" and required fine-tuning .. At the beginning of the war, the connections were still quite cumbersome, the logistics were not properly debugged .. ...

    Also, do not forget that Japan in the Far East could not be ignored either ...

    It was necessary to gain time to carry out "work on the mistakes", but there was just no time left.
    That's why it turned out what happened.
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 10 June 2021 10: 05
      +7
      Quote: Landwarrior
      As they wrote in the article, Stalin was neither a fool nor a blind man.

      Yes, he knew everything. He simply did not expect that Europe would disintegrate within a few months and be occupied by Hitler.
    2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 10: 50
      -4
      Quote: Landwarrior
      The experience of the civil war with its dashing cavalry attacks in the conditions of modern warfare was practically not applicable.

      swoops were not swoops, but cavalry in those very famous headquarters games of January 1941 was quite considered as a means of breakthrough along with mechanized formations.
      1. Non-fighter
        Non-fighter 10 June 2021 20: 29
        0
        KMG - mechanized horse group 1942-1943, the Connections were used quite successfully. The cavalry acts as a motorized infantry, a mobile infantry unit. The combat regulations of that time assumed the use of cavalry in battle as infantry.
  • Mother Theresa
    Mother Theresa 10 June 2021 08: 54
    -8
    It is necessary to make a separate section on the site Samsonovshchina.
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 10: 05
      -5
      Quote: Mother Teresa
      It is necessary to make a separate section on the site Samsonovshchina.

      No need - this section is called "History". In essence, this is a cell where the collective Samsonov, a scribe monk, sprinkles his writings. And outside the monastery walls, the nun Tatra tirelessly drags brushwood to the fire pit, where she is going to burn the fuck up all the enemies of the communists. With a break for a prayer service under the icon of Comrade Stalin. laughing
      1. IS-80_RVGK2
        IS-80_RVGK2 10 June 2021 23: 33
        +1
        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
        brushwood to the fire pit

        In the middle of which Olgovich is tied, caught with Mikhalkov's proclamations urging everyone to repent and urgently vote for the return of serfdom.
  • tihonmarine
    tihonmarine 10 June 2021 09: 30
    +8
    2. Skillful actions of special forces and German agents created hotbeds of chaos and panic in the border areas.

    And they didn't even need "skillful actions of the German special forces ", when almost all the border territories of the USSR, Western Ukraine, Western Belarus and the Baltic States were annexed in 1939-1940, where there was a sufficient number of agents and even more German accomplices. sabotage groups were created from the local population, which were commanded by the Germans, nationalists and officers of the former national armies. In advance, warehouses with weapons were created. By the time of the attack on the USSR, these organizations were already "under arms" and had specific tasks.
  • smaug78
    smaug78 10 June 2021 09: 39
    -7
    Why Stalin did not believe in Hitler's attack in the summer of 1941
    Stalin believed in a possible attack by Hitler, but believed that the outbreak of hostilities would be preceded by a period of political instability in relations with Germany. Stupid Samsonovism again
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 10: 22
      -1
      Quote: smaug78
      Stalin believed


      laughing
      1. smaug78
        smaug78 10 June 2021 11: 25
        -3
        actually ...
  • Glory1974
    Glory1974 10 June 2021 10: 09
    0
    strategically, no one doubted that war was inevitable. They were preparing for war. After the Soviet-Finnish, large-scale work began to eradicate the shortcomings identified during the hostilities.
    Tactically, the war began unexpectedly. But even during the war, from time to time, now we, now the Germans managed to deliver unexpected blows in certain sectors of the front.
    It must be admitted that the Germans carried out a number of successful measures to disguise their actions. The camouflage was carried out according to a single plan and concept. Everyone was involved, from the top of the Reich (Hitler himself announced his friendship with the USSR through the press), ending with the last soldier who covered his tank with a mass.
    The entire German grouping at our borders was deployed by the front to the west. There were rear units near our borders. Our intelligence reported correctly, in such conditions it is impossible to attack. (You cannot put a field kitchen at the forefront of the strike, and have tanks in the third echelon to develop success).
    2 days before the start of the war, the German group began to "turn around" in the eastern direction. Hence the recollection that "the noise of engines is constantly heard on the adjacent side."
    From that moment on, everything became clear. But of course, during these few days they managed to do little, and even could not determine the direction of the main attack.
    1. smaug78
      smaug78 10 June 2021 12: 03
      +8
      The entire German grouping at our borders was deployed by the front to the west. There were rear units near our borders.
      What are you saying? Will you please with documents?
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 10 June 2021 15: 51
        0
        Will you please with documents?

        Which ones are you interested in? Maps with the locations of command posts or combat orders for the Wehrmacht?
        1. smaug78
          smaug78 10 June 2021 16: 10
          +4
          I'll write in a simple way: maps that show the location of the Wehrmacht units in order to confirm your words:
          The entire German grouping at our borders was deployed by the front to the west. There were rear units near our borders.
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 10 June 2021 16: 34
            0
            these maps are not available on the Internet. Information from a number of Ph.D. theses written at the Academy of the General Staff
            1. smaug78
              smaug78 10 June 2021 16: 45
              +4
              They don't believe the words. And the maps on the Internet suggest otherwise.
              1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 20: 36
                -3
                Quote: smaug78
                They don't believe the words.

                Pffff ... Checkmate!
                Quote: glory1974
                Information from a number of Ph.D. theses written at the Academy of the General Staff

                Do you dare not believe it ??? laughing
                1. smaug78
                  smaug78 10 June 2021 21: 15
                  -5
                  Do you dare not believe it ???
                  Do you think it's time to start repenting? wink And to admit that the back of the Germans, looking to the East, confused intelligence and Stalin. Yes - this is a very unusual kunstuk laughing... And then I thought that the Germans simply placed their battle formations in the second line, and they look like ...
                  1. Glory1974
                    Glory1974 15 June 2021 08: 09
                    0
                    And then I thought that the Germans simply placed their battle formations in the second line, and they look like ...

                    What is the difference between the formation of a battle formation with combat units in the second line, from
                    what did I write?
                    the German grouping at our borders was deployed by the front to the west. There were rear units near our borders.

                    repeat
                    1. smaug78
                      smaug78 15 June 2021 10: 19
                      -5
                      The fact that the front is deployed to the West according to your quote, in my case, the front is deployed to the east. hi
              2. Glory1974
                Glory1974 11 June 2021 08: 19
                +5
                They don't believe the words.

                You can read here on the site, a series of articles on the operational and tactical camouflage of the Wehrmacht before the war, which compared the data of our intelligence and the real state of affairs, which became known after the war.
                maps on the internet suggest otherwise

                the maps that are, do they show the position of the parts according to the camouflage plan or real?
                Well, you can think logically. How was surprise achieved already during the war? As a rule, a large number of new units appeared at the front unexpectedly and quickly for the enemy. At night they moved to the line of contact of the parties, and in the morning into battle. What prevents you from thinking that in June 41 it was different?
            2. ccsr
              ccsr 11 June 2021 13: 28
              -13%
              Quote: glory1974
              Information from a number of Ph.D. theses written at the Academy of the General Staff

              Indeed, as evidenced by intelligence materials, support units and rear units of many formations were deployed long before the arrival of the Wehrmacht combat units to the border, i.e. by early June. This gave rise to some local clever people to assert that the intelligence did not know anything and incorrectly reported on the deployment of German troops. Moreover, operational groups of officers from the higher directorates and headquarters of the Wehrmacht began to appear in advance in the border zone, establishing communications and coordinating the deployment locations of combat units. And this was also recorded by our intelligence, it is enough to carefully study the materials from the book of V.V. Kondrashov. "History of Military Intelligence".
              Subsequently, many combat units, including those with armored vehicles, located 200-400 km from the border, and even from Germany, arrived on the eve of June 22 to the deployment sites, i.e. 2-4 days before the attack. So there really was an advanced deployment of the rear and support units of the Wehrmacht on our border, although I do not think that this could mislead the leaders of military intelligence about preparations for a future war in the preparation of reports.
      2. IS-80_RVGK2
        IS-80_RVGK2 10 June 2021 23: 40
        +5
        This is the reason. Finally found. And everyone wondered why it turned out so badly in 41. The answer turned out to be simple - the Germans were advancing on us in defiance of all military science with rear units. For such a fascist meanness, the Soviet soldier was not at all ready.
  • Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 10 June 2021 10: 22
    +9
    Quote: tihonmarine
    Quote: Landwarrior
    As they wrote in the article, Stalin was neither a fool nor a blind man.

    Yes, he knew everything. He simply did not expect that Europe would disintegrate within a few months and be occupied by Hitler.

    The leadership of the USSR hoped that for an attack on the USSR Hitler would need some at least a formal reason, like Gleiwitz.
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 10: 28
      -5
      Quote: Landwarrior
      The leadership of the USSR hoped that for an attack on the USSR Hitler would need some at least a formal reason, like Gleiwitz.

      Indeed ... The very leadership of the USSR followed this trend - Mainila, for example.
    2. smaug78
      smaug78 10 June 2021 12: 02
      -1
      The leadership of the USSR hoped that for an attack on the USSR Hitler would need some at least a formal reason, like Gleiwitz.
      And what would the leadership of the USSR do in one day?
    3. Shiden
      Shiden 10 June 2021 17: 51
      +1
      Denmark, Norway, Holland, Belgium, Yugoslavia like Germany did not declare war on them and there were no provocations, and I do not think that Stalin was one hundred percent sure that Hitler was an official reason to declare war.
  • BAI
    BAI 10 June 2021 11: 51
    +4
    If in material terms the Soviet Union achieved tremendous success, then in the moral and psychological sphere it was an unstable system.

    Quite the opposite. With the backward (in the bulk) technology, the ideological motivation was very high.
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 10 June 2021 13: 20
      +2
      Quote: BAI
      Rather the opposite.

      This whole phrase is actually a masterpiece of Samsonosophy.
      That is:
      If in material terms the Soviet Union achieved tremendous success, then in the moral and psychological sphere it was an unstable system in a dangerous period of development. ..
      therefore the Germans tried to destroy the USSR with a blitzkrieg


      Summary: blitzkrieg works only against the "morally unstable system in the period of development" (oh, how!)
      A stable system, therefore, must be taken by blockade and starvation. laughing
      And, of course, the damned vegetarian miscalculated - the USSR had a secret weapon in the person of the unyielding genius leader.
    2. boris epstein
      boris epstein 10 June 2021 17: 11
      0
      By the way, during perestroika, this photograph of Ye Khaldei was substituted from "Political instructor" to "Kombat", although the photograph shows the junior political instructor Aleksey Eremenko, raising a company to counterattack. The counterattack was successful, the company completed the combat mission, but Eremenko died in its course.
  • Vend
    Vend 10 June 2021 12: 12
    +3
    Stalin knew. that there will be a war with Germany, it is enough to read his ACCOUNTING REPORT AT THE XVIII CONGRESS OF THE PARTY ON THE WORK OF THE VKP (B) Central Committee of March 10, 1939. Probably it is just after the Stalinist propaganda, created this duck. About. that Stalin did not believe.
  • Landwarrior
    Landwarrior 10 June 2021 12: 59
    +5
    Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
    Quote: Landwarrior
    The experience of the civil war with its dashing cavalry attacks in the conditions of modern warfare was practically not applicable.

    swoops were not swoops, but cavalry in those very famous headquarters games of January 1941 was quite considered as a means of breakthrough along with mechanized formations.
    Well, there is nothing strange, given that there were no other highly mobile connections at hand, and the mechanized corps were too clumsy (again I wrote above - the logistics were limping on both legs). Moreover, the front was not continuous in time, the cavalry introduced into the breakthrough could make a rustle in the rear ...
  • Normal
    Normal 10 June 2021 13: 10
    +1
    The author in the first part of the article The successes of the German blitzkrieg, in my opinion, correctly describes one of the reasons for the defeats of the Red Army in the first months of the war. Very convincing. I was even surprised when I looked at who the author was.

    Further, I do not agree with everything, not with everything, although in general, I believe, the picture is correct.
  • ccsr
    ccsr 10 June 2021 14: 27
    -7
    With these facts before his eyes, the rationalist Stalin did not believe in Hitler's attack in the spring and summer of 1941. For all the logical reasons, this could not happen. The war was expected around 1942, when Hitler would solve the problem of the second front.

    I think that the author will not prove this in any way, as well as why instructions were given already in May to move several armies from the internal districts to KOVO and ZAPOVO with an arrival date of June-July 1941.
    Even the urgency with which the revision of the cover plans began and their readiness by June 1, 1941 suggests that preparations were underway for the outbreak of the war in the coming weeks or months.
    As some authors correctly noted, there was no strategic surprise at the start of the war, preparations were being made for it, and the meeting on the evening of June 21 is evidence of this. Huge damage occurred due to the fact that by 04.00 the troops did not take up positions on the border in accordance with the existing cover plans, and this was the result of mistakes both by the leadership of the People's Commissariat of Defense and those officials of the district who hesitantly reacted to the Directive w / n.
    As the experience of the first hours of the war showed, even the skillful actions of the border guards made it possible to delay the advance of German troops for up to several hours, often without the support of the Red Army units. It is not hard to imagine what would have happened on the border if all the covering regiments had taken up their positions by 03.30 in accordance with the covering plans, even with the weapons and ammunition that they had.
    To knock out an entrenched infantry regiment, and even in fortified positions, is not such a simple matter, which was later proved more than once during the battles of the beginning of the war, when the Germans ran into a well-organized defense and retreated suffering losses.
    1. Cartalon
      Cartalon 10 June 2021 15: 18
      -2
      If the troops would take positions, only some details would change and we would get a few more heroic episodes, the rifle division cannot hold a front of 30 km.
      The strike forces of the Germans would have broken through in the same way and would have closed in the same way.
      There was nothing to parry their blows.
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 10 June 2021 16: 57
        +1
        Right. Minor details would consist in the fact that not disorganized units would remain in the rear of the Germans, but troops on alert, somewhat battered, but equipped with weapons, ammunition and equipment. What do you think the German logistics would be like under such conditions?) How much fuel would Guderian get for the tanks? And the cartridges? And the shells? How much would German losses have increased if they had to pick most of these positions? But you would have to ...
        1. Cartalon
          Cartalon 10 June 2021 22: 36
          +2
          In the German rear, wrecked units would have abandoned without ammunition, just like in current reality.
          If the Germans were met by a mobilized army, it would be another matter and the Germans would have defeated it due to their superiority in everything, but they themselves would not have gone beyond the Dnieper.
          And the stretched thread of rifle regiments, without artillery, without established communications, without air cover, would have caused problems of the level of infantry divisions who had to pin them down, while mobile troops were torn to the Soviet rear, these units did not have any impact on the communications of the Germans, for this we must not sit in the trenches.
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 11 June 2021 09: 27
            +3
            You contradict yourself and the logic of events. How did the Germans work? They broke through the lines of defense, rushing striking units along the roads, trying to advance as far as possible. What did our troops oppose to them? First, the border guards, who had to be stormed according to all the rules of art, losing a lot of people and equipment.
            Secondly, the units, disorganized by the strike, did not have prepared positions and lines of defense, and which began to retreat indiscriminately, trying to get ahead of the advancing German "kulaks" and "stand to death" in front of them. Since the Germans had superiority in the mobility of these very shock units, the Red Army simply could not catch up with them, especially without the supply of ammunition and fuel. Plus constant air strikes, destroying the remnants of the organizational structure.
            What would happen if these parts of the Red Army were in prepared, fortified positions? First, they would be fully equipped with fuels and lubricants and cartridges, according to the Charter for fully deployed units. Unlike the situation in which these units were - supply according to the norms of peacetime, there is really nothing to shoot with (this is how the quartermasters and in general the big bosses understood the order "not to succumb to provocations")
            Secondly, they would sit in the field fortifications. The very logic of what is happening would prompt the minimally adequate commanders line of action - to continue to sit in them, and continue to shoot at the Germans! This is exactly what the border guards did, inflicting heavy losses on the attackers. At least double the number of units that would have done the same - would the mobile groups have broken far? When are most of the roads under fire?
      2. ccsr
        ccsr 10 June 2021 17: 55
        +1
        Quote: Cartalon
        If the troops would take positions, only some details would change and we would get a few more heroic episodes, the rifle division cannot hold a front of 30 km.

        Even a day or three, the enemy's delays at the border would not have allowed him to deploy his units on our territory, i.e. there would be a blockage on the march and a mixing of Wehrmacht units on the border, which means that our aviation would be easier to attack them. Moreover, this made it possible to organize the deployment of the district units in accordance with the cover plan, and the troops would receive a reserve for further battles.
        Quote: Cartalon
        The strike forces of the Germans would have broken through in the same way and would have closed in the same way.

        The Brest Fortress showed that not everything was so simple, and the Germans could not capture some of the bunkers on the UR line for several days. There are still some reasons for a change in the general situation in the first month of the war, if only it was possible to take the positions of the covering regiments in time, including the demoralization of the German troops, if they were thwarted by the rapid advance and the loss of personnel increased.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 10 June 2021 16: 35
    0
    It makes no difference whether Stalin believed or not.
    Another scenario, the beginning of a war between the USSR and Germany in the summer of 1941 is practically unrealistic.
    1. Germany in all variants and in all moments (including during the German offensive in the West) was ahead of the USSR in concentration of forces because:
    - I have already fought and mobilized.
    - She could always stop an offensive to the West and transfer forces to the East along the internal line.
    - The capacity of transport is more than twice that of the USSR.
    - The average transport distance is more than two times shorter than for the USSR.
    2. Time was enough for the USSR to completely eliminate the huge industrial, scientific and technical lagging behind Germany, inherited from tsarist Russia. The USSR only managed to significantly reduce this lag.
    3. It was very important that Germany attacked the USSR, and not vice versa. Only in this way did Germany find itself in isolation, and the USSR became one of the leaders of the world anti-fascist coalition.
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 10 June 2021 16: 50
    +3
    The author diligently justifies Stalin in what he is absolutely not guilty of. As a result, some kind of article ... In general, of course, Stalin was not deceived. Our country developed as fast as it could. Her industry, her people, and her army. That's all.
    Yes, numerous mistakes were made, which cost us a lot of blood. But when you do something that no one in the world has ever done, you cannot do without mistakes, including huge, terrible mistakes.
    Looking closely at the situation, we see almost the same thing - the performers "did not pull." Desperately trying to fulfill the orders of the leader and the will of the party, people did not understand what they were doing. Neither education nor the ability to think was enough. As a result, the instruction to basically leave the fortifications of the old border and move the troops to the new one resulted in a massive delivery of explosives and explosions of armored arrays of pillboxes, for example. the general desperately wanted to curry favor and "overfulfill". Replacing brains with gallant screams.
    This was the main mistake, and, let's be honest, Stalin's fault. It was necessary to pay primary attention to the methods of finding suitable people for leadership and training methods, both for managers and all other specialists without exception. I really wanted to become independent from the capitalists in the production of steel. And it would be better to become independent in the quality of leadership and execution early ...
    There were, of course, objective reasons. For example, the mass of very loyal associates were only loyal associates. Without a mind, without the ability to lead at least something, without the necessary qualities for development. Where to put them? How to throw them, the only support, on the sidelines of the process? And these people tried ... to the best of their intelligence and skills. Exploding armored vehicles, yes.
    1. Non-fighter
      Non-fighter 10 June 2021 20: 08
      +3
      About the fortifications on the old border. When were they built and against whom? More precisely in what fashion and against what caliber? As practice has shown, it was necessary to build the Maginot Line at least, and preferably 2-3 at once.
      Consider this moment: 1 MB nightmare is a machine gunner in a bunker shooting in the field. During the 2nd MV, this was treated simply with an artillery assault a la Shtug or SU-76M, which was in the infantry order. Pay attention to how the architecture of bunkers changed in the interwar period. So the outdated fortifications of the old border were useless. And sitting in them is to give a gift to the enemy.
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 11 June 2021 09: 36
        +4
        You are trying to win the war in one battle. This is a war, not a game. Troops collide, suffer losses. They change their position and collide again ... The one who destroyed the enemy's will to resist wins. You can hack any position, anywhere, any device. There are no absolutely reliable fortifications, just as there is no absolutely black body. So what?
        The question is simply how many people the Germans would have to put in, how much ammunition to spend, how much equipment to lose. The fortification of the old border could have taken such a price from the Germans that it might not have come to a battle near Moscow. This was their role - to destroy as many of the storming people as possible. When you defend in the field, before the break in the battle, your losses are approximately equal to those of the attackers. And if you are in fortification, then the ratio is at least 1 to 4. Taking four Germans for one of ours on the old border, it was generally possible to arrange "with little blood on someone else's territory." Although this is already a fantasy, of course, the training of the Red Army was miserable and did not make it possible to act competently in the offensive (and defense was almost never taught, even almost no mines were made), but the counterstrike would have come out mighty.
        1. Konnick
          Konnick 11 June 2021 10: 06
          +1
          This was their role - to destroy as many of the storming people as possible. When you defend in the field, before the break in the battle, your losses are approximately equal to those of the attackers. And if you are in fortification, then the ratio is at least 1 to 4. Taking four Germans for one of ours on the old border, it was generally possible to arrange "with little blood on someone else's territory."

          Why do you think that the Germans would storm the pillboxes with infantry head-on, they already had the experience of taking such defensive structures using smoke shells and aviation, remember the Maginot Line. The Polotsk UR held out for 21 days, but he did not stop to take Vitebsk, remaining surrounded and the Germans were in no hurry to storm it. Such fortifications were relevant until the 20s, and with the improvement of bomber aviation, they ceased to have such a deterrent.
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 11 June 2021 10: 15
            +2
            For the simple reason that the URs kept all the roads around them under control. The supply of troops that broke through bypassing these fortifications would be a monstrous task in terms of complexity. Plus the threat of a strike in the rear of normally equipped, controlled, combat-ready units.
            The blitzkrieg concept envisaged that after deep breakthroughs in the enemy's defense line, the Soviet troops remaining in the operational rear would turn into an uncontrollable, poorly armed, disoriented crowd. Alas, in many ways it happened.
            The final catastrophe did not happen, because some of the troops were still able to withdraw in relative order. But millions of fighters died in these crowds, through no fault of their own. If the commanders had retained control over normally equipped and combat-ready units, everything would have happened quite differently.
            True, in this case, almost with a guarantee, we would have received a war with the coalition - the USA-France-Germany, to which the British would very likely join. The devil knows how it would have ended.
            1. Konnick
              Konnick 11 June 2021 15: 08
              0
              The supply of troops that broke through bypassing these fortifications would be a monstrous task in terms of complexity.

              I agree, but the supply of the advanced tank units and motorized infantry of the German wedges was carried out by air with transport aircraft. In general, blitzkrieg tactics were tied to close cooperation with aviation.
              It would be more helpful for us to have an efficient aviation capable of ending the German domination in the air, it would have been better to spend money on the production of aircraft and training pilots than on throwing money into concrete. It looks like the use of aviation in the civil war in Spain, which played a major role in the defeat of the Republicans, did not teach us., And it seems that the Finnish showed that without dive bombers such reinforced concrete. strengthening is difficult to take. Successful actions of Zhukov on Khalkhin-gol began only after the conquest of air supremacy - normal supplies went. And in June 41st we could stop the German tank wedges. But we safely lost our aviation on the first day of the war. For Germany, our aviation was a priority target at the beginning of the war. The victories of the Red Army began only when the German aviation did not help or could no longer help the ground forces. The first time it happened during the defense of Murmansk, the second during the defense of Leningrad, the third time during the defense of Moscow and further counteroffensive, the fourth time during the encirclement at Stalingrad, and then there was a dress rehearsal in front of the Kursk Bulge in the form of the Kuban battle in the air, and only during the Bagration operation "just the apotheosis of the actions of our aviation, a mirror-like repetition of June 41st.
              1. Mikhail3
                Mikhail3 12 June 2021 11: 30
                0
                The supply of tank units by air is problematic even now) And at that time it was generally impossible, even more so in an offensive and not in a boiler. There is simply not enough carrying capacity, and there are not enough airfields.
                Aviation was extremely important, but the country did absolutely everything it could do. It just wasn't enough for that moment. And all the same pit - training of pilots was built criminally wrong, as well as training of commanders in general.
                As far as you can understand, Stalin did not have enough for about 2 years to re-equip the army.
                1. Konnick
                  Konnick 12 June 2021 11: 43
                  0
                  ) And at that time it was generally impossible, especially in the offensive and not in the cauldron.

                  Why so categorically, do you think a whole wagon train was going behind the advanced units of the tank groups, only the air supply could promptly supply the gluttonous.
                  1. Mikhail3
                    Mikhail3 12 June 2021 11: 49
                    0
                    Pancake. Well, what are you talking about? What an air supply, fear God! In order to land a transport aircraft, you need a stationary, not a field airfield of high quality. The strip is long, smooth, with pointers. This can be done in a cauldron when the soldier has nothing to do.
                    Capture of Soviet airfields? Well, this is not a movie! The USSR did not have a sufficient number of these very airfields! And they, suddenly, were not where the tanks ran out of fuel. In addition, the Germans did not get the Soviet airfields intact, the war was all around. As a supply line, they could only be counted on in a fantastic book. The mere task of the sudden organization of airfield services of hundreds of sites captured half an hour ago ...
                    The war was fought with fire and wheels. Especially with wheels.
        2. Non-fighter
          Non-fighter 11 June 2021 19: 03
          +1
          Read Veremeyev. It is a pity that he died, but managed to write a couple of articles about the so-called "Stalin's Line", about the Soviet fortification. And notice what he writes in italics. One of the sources of information is "A German Officer's Handbook of Soviet Fortifications", spring 1941 edition. Everything was there, up to georeferencing, shelling sectors and photographs, inclusive.
      2. ivamoss
        ivamoss 13 June 2021 03: 49
        +3
        You wrote it right. After the construction of our bunkers on the old border, the tactics of these structures changed. The fire weapons of the new bunkers began to fire not frontal, but flank. This made it difficult for the enemy to fire from guns at the embrasures.
        The few artillery pillboxes (two-gun and several four-gun) were also vulnerable to enemy fire. The embrasures of the guns in these structures were covered with shields of small thickness, measuring about half a meter by a meter. And this is with the frontal arrangement of ambrosures. In addition, the pillboxes contained weak 4 mm guns with a barrel length of 76,2 calibers.
        In addition, the "smart general staff" in order to increase the line troops reduced the troops of the old URs, which led to the failure of the equipment of bunkers, the flooding of some of them, etc.
    2. VS
      VS 11 June 2021 20: 40
      -12%
      and where in the former peasant country to get the Hindenburgs then? (((
  • andybuts
    andybuts 10 June 2021 16: 55
    +3
    If in material terms the Soviet Union achieved tremendous success, then in the moral and psychological sphere it was an unstable system in a dangerous period of development.


    How in the moral and psychological sphere the USSR was ready for war like no one else. There were problems in material support, combat experience, training of troops, the general level of education, but in moral terms, the country was initially aimed at defending its freedom and independence, its achievements and transformations that took place after the revolution. And the atrocities of the Nazis simply further strengthened this confidence among the people.
  • NF68
    NF68 10 June 2021 17: 11
    +6
    Stalin, unlike Hitler, was a realist and he well understood that fighting on two fronts for Germany, with its limited resources, was extremely risky. In addition, the United States began to show more and more active participation in the affairs of Europe and in an increasing number supplied BI with everything it needed. The dashing cavalry charge of the Germans in 1940 was repulsed by the British and the Germans were forced to go over to a long siege of the British metropolis. Time worked against the Germans, and sooner or later, the world's most powerful military-economic potential of the United States could thoroughly strengthen BI. And then take on an additional burden and divide your already not great resources between east and west? Unlike Hitler, Stalin in 1938 and 1939 "instilled" the Japanese and repulsed their desire to fight with the USSR. Adolf Aloisovich was not so far-sighted and often acted according to the principle "The main thing is to start a fight, and then it will be seen." For that he suffered in 1945.
    1. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 11 June 2021 09: 40
      +6
      The United States actively built factories and factories in Germany (which supplied the Germans with weapons, equipment and ammunition until the end of the war), poured huge money into Hitler, helped him in every possible way, even supplied rare earth elements for armor. Why should Stalin consider the United States to be his ally? Until they finally decided on the side (and it happened not even in 41), there were no prerequisites for that.
      1. NF68
        NF68 11 June 2021 16: 16
        +2
        Quote: Mikhail3
        The United States actively built factories and factories in Germany (which supplied the Germans with weapons, equipment and ammunition until the end of the war), poured huge money into Hitler, helped him in every possible way, even supplied rare earth elements for armor. Why should Stalin consider the United States to be his ally? Until they finally decided on the side (and it happened not even in 41), there were no prerequisites for that.


        The Swedes helped Hitler the most. Without iron ore, Hitler would hardly have dared to fight. From this ore, Germany received the highest quality steel - in 1943, the amount of this steel was 43%.
        1. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 12 June 2021 11: 33
          +2
          And the French built unique aircraft engines for huge transport workers. And the Czechs shooters and armored vehicles in huge quantities. All together diligently supplied food, ammunition, provided conditions for rest and treatment ... All of Europe actively fought with us. And the USA.
          1. NF68
            NF68 13 June 2021 16: 46
            +1
            Quote: Mikhail3
            And the French built unique aircraft engines for huge transport workers.



            There was nothing unique about these engines. The Germans were simply forced to use what the French already had or what could be mass-produced in the near future, since the development of German aviation throughout the WWII was constrained by the insufficient number of aircraft engines produced by the Germans. The same Germans, British and Americans had aircraft engines much more perfect than the French ones. By the end of the 30s and the beginning of the 40s, the French in this matter lagged behind other most developed countries.
  • Non-fighter
    Non-fighter 10 June 2021 19: 57
    +4
    Do not forget that Stalin's foreign policy opportunities in the spring and summer of 1941 were very limited because:
    1. Reliable ally - 1 pc. Mongolia led by Choibolsan. Anyone who wants the list can expand. The key word is "reliable".
    2. As a result of the Finnish war, the USSR was expelled from the League of Nations (then the UN). The next step is to declare it an aggressor state. Are the foreign policy implications clear? The Goebbels boys would have played this moment for sure. It is not known where Lend-Lease would be and where it would go.
    The anti-Hitler coalition was legally registered in Tehran-43 with all the seals and signatures of the top officials. Before that - backstage negotiations, it was not for nothing that Molotov flew to America in a bomber.
    1. Shiden
      Shiden 10 June 2021 20: 20
      +9
      Ally number two of the USSR Tuvan People's Republic. The only ally who sent an army to the German-Soviet front.
      1. Non-fighter
        Non-fighter 10 June 2021 20: 22
        +3
        I agree. I somehow forgot about Tuva sad
  • Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 10 June 2021 23: 37
    +2
    Here it is
    This was not a typical Western democratic politician who, at the first threat, falls into a stupor and hysteria.
    I just couldn't help but comment!
    You know, it is very fashionable to pile on the West for "softness" - but we take England in BB2 - and what do we see? When Britain no longer had unbroken military allies, its ground army barely took off, the US entry into the war was not yet so obvious and it was not at all obvious that we would become the WB ally in the coalition - the "soft" British stood. They stood both when Hitler tried to intimidate them with bombing, and when the Japanese crumbled the eastern flank of their empire. They did not conclude a peace with Hitler - they cannot be called cowards, and even more so, they cannot be called a coward or Churchill's hysteric - yes, the man was a lover of drinking, hated commies, sometimes utter nonsense for the sake of a good word - but he was a strong and principled person.
    The same Roosevelt - can you call him a figure in a stupor or a hysterical? Or Eisenhower. They are people of action and well-thought-out collegial decisions. Later, years later, all these traditions are degraded. After that, however, our traditions have already degraded. And traditions of perseverance as well.
    Perhaps what you said can be used in relation to the elites of a RANGE of Western countries - France / Italy. But this cannot be extrapolated to the entire Western world, or even to its large part - neither Franco, nor the elites of the Scandinavian states, nor even the Polish elites, for all the chimericity of their plans and ideas, cannot be blamed for this. If we are talking about Chamberlain, this man was not hysterical and did not fall into a stupor, he had his own logic, the logic of a politician who tried with all his might to delay the next European massacre by 100500 days. History has proven that he was wrong - well, who is 100% right? The same Stalin was far from being so good, and even more so from the point of view of the history of the 20th century, and even more so the history of the Second World War and the pre-war period.
  • Ivanushka Ivanov
    Ivanushka Ivanov 11 June 2021 10: 04
    +1
    What the hell is this? Stalin was well aware of the attack and the approximate timing. Moreover, the Germans themselves regularly leaked information to him. The USSR was well prepared for war. If it were otherwise, the war would be lost, because it is impossible to prepare in a few months.

    The problem is that a priori the first blow was delivered by Germany, respectively, and the Soviet plan was directly related to the actions of the Germans. The whole difficulty was that this first blow did not become the last. And on account of the fact that, they say, they did not prepare, because they did not create an echeloned defense line, they did not saturate the border zones with troops. That is, they did not create something like the Maginot Line, only much worse and more leaky due to the colossal length. And as a result - one big pot for the Red Army? - Are the "experts" grieving about this?

    This is exactly what Hitler dreamed of, which is why the Germans regularly leaked information to the USSR.

    The task of the USSR on the battlefield was difficult - in all sectors to grope for the front, stretch, but not break and not break, so to speak, take the enemy by the hibot. And then, imposing a continuous struggle, stretch the supply line, scatter over the area. Unfortunately, at first, the performing skills of the Soviet military leaders were not up to par. But Stalin quickly and effectively corrected the personnel problem.
  • Garist Pavel
    Garist Pavel 11 June 2021 12: 05
    +1
    I think that Yakovlev and the company corrected the archives, because this question was raised by the murdered Ilyukhin. And the stigma of the Stalinist "generals" was in the cannon. So Stalin knew about the attack and was preparing for it, because now it is reliably known about at least one order from 18 on bringing the troops to full readiness. So I think it's a betrayal, a conspiracy. Pavlov's actions fully confirm this. (Do not withdraw the troops, remove the weapons from the planes, withdraw the artillery to one place in the field, etc.) If it was possible then, imagine what can happen now if the children, babos and native houses of the "elite" are there ?
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 28
    -13%
    avtar with logic is clearly not at ease)))

    "" The Nazis were able to organize an unexpected strike. They managed to present the pulling of their forces to the East as a deceit, disinformation. Hitler managed to wage a successful information and psychological war, giving Moscow the impression that he was not going to strike first. This allowed the Wehrmacht to fully use the surprise effect and sweep away the battle formations of the Red Army on the western border (especially in Belarus).

    During the years of glasnost, perestroika and the formation of the Russian Federation, the myth of Stalin's "gullibility" was created. They say that the Soviet leader, because of his stupidity and stubbornness, did not heed the numerous warnings about the impending aggression of the Third Reich. Stalin did not believe his intelligence officers, various well-wishers of the USSR and reports from England. Therefore, I am to blame for all the troubles and failures of the USSR. Plus Beria, who played along with the owner and sent everyone who came with bad news to the Gulag.

    However, pretty soon serious military studies appeared, which smashed this version to smithereens. Stalin was not a gullible fool. ""

    How did the spiritualists give - they know exactly what STALIN "thought" there and whom he did not believe)))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 32
    -12%
    Quote: Proxima
    The Red Army was hopelessly losing to the Germans in terms of the number of troops entering the battle at the same time. That is, the German machine, fine-tuned for two years of the war, primitively smashed the "raw" units of the Red Army in parts. By the way, our professional military could report to Stalin thoroughly with calculations, and not behave like Pavlov, for example, who lulled Stalin's vigilance with calm and rosy reports, for which, by the way, he suffered a well-deserved punishment. And so, unfortunately, we were doomed to suffer defeat in the initial period of the war.

    That is, if Stalin had received information from the military (from the intelligence service according to Isaev) that the war was coming soon, then the density of troops would have increased at once on the border?))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 35
    -14%
    Quote: Herman 4223
    In other words, preemptive deployment. Troops not deployed to wartime states are ineffective. They cannot be moved anywhere or sent into battle. Therefore, there were only covering forces on the border, more or less filled at the expense of large training fees. These forces were superior to the Wehrmacht. The rest were either in places of deployment or moving towards the border. They all got into battle in turn. The first two weeks of the war, the Red Army did not have troops mobilized before the wartime states.


    you think if Stalin had cut in the mobilization of the entire Red Army in MARCH, then there would have been more on granzia than there was - not our 42 SD stretched Up to 40 km even where the TG can go, but more like?
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 36
    -10%
    Quote: glory1974
    The Red Army was hopelessly losing to the Germans in terms of the number of troops entering the battle at the same time. That is, the German machine, fine-tuned for two years of the war, primitively smashed the "raw" units of the Red Army in parts.

    I agree with you.
    According to the combat regulations of the late 30s, the battle formation of the troops was divided into an attacking group, a support group, a reserve group, etc. It turned out that out of the total number of the division of 7-8 thousand fighters, 400-500 were conducting the attack. Only with the beginning of the war did they begin to break this vicious practice, create 1st and 2nd echelons, bring the order of battle to what we have now.

    in general, the formation of forces was in echelon in the Red Army and BEFORE June 22))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 37
    -11%
    Quote: Vasily50
    Obolensky
    Hitler's invading army numbered just under 8000000 (eight million) officers, plus about a million satellites. THE ENTIRE RED ARMY for 1941 was slightly less than 5000000 (five million) fighters and commanders. 1500000 (one and a half million) in the Far East and Central Asia, about 1000000 (million) in Transcaucasia, awaited the invasion of the French-British.
    The RED ARMY was urgently deployed from the beginning of 1941, but they did not have time, so the mobilization warehouses fell to the Germans. But Pavlov's frank betrayal should not be forgotten either. During the attack, the Germans very much hoped for a military coup, especially since they had experience in Spain, when Trotsky's admirers captured Madrid and staged terror against the COMMUNISTS when the Nazis attacked.

    maladets)))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 39
    -13%
    Quote: Bar1
    .
    They managed to present the pulling of their forces to the East as a deceit, disinformation


    how stupid to think so, it's like imagining two people opposite each other, one puts on brass knuckles, gets into a fighting stance and swings to strike, and the second looks complacently at all these actions, does nothing for defense and only insults one thing: ...
    But the most important thing is that historians are constantly repeating about this, about deception, about the fact that there will be no offensive of ready-made armies near the border, instead of exploring the real, real picture of that time.

    maladets)) here is just about it))
    https://liewar.ru/knigi-o-vojne/364-antiisaev-mifologiya-o-prichinakh-tragedii-nachala-vov-skazki-i-realnost-malenkaya-lozh-bolshogo-cheloveka-knopki-i-gradusniki.html
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 41
    -13%
    Quote: Bar1
    Quote: Alexey RA
    As in this fight there were three. The first pretended to swing towards the third - in a completely different direction. And against the second he imitated a defensive stance so that he would not get into battle.


    what are the losses of England in 2 mv? And no half a million? Therefore, England, as a participant in the fight, is excluded.

    In general, a return to the question that has already been repeatedly raised here:
    What was not visible from Moscow, what is the accumulation of forces on the border of the USSR?

    Some eccentrics claim that the MILLION grouping near the borders of the USSR was completely invisible, and the fact that on June 22 that Napoleon crossed the border into Ingushetia did not alert anyone? Maybe all the same it should have been overlooked, than not overlooked?
    Martirosyan claims that it was Zhukov and Timoshenko who did not fulfill Stalin's order by June 22 - FULL COMMITMENT, but there is no evidence of this. Therefore, the beginning of the war looks strange, everyone knew, no one was ready, it seems that there was some kind of collusion / agreement in any case, Stalin from responsibility for the fact that he missed the beginning of the war should not be removed.

    aapyat maladets))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 42
    -14%
    Quote: stalkerwalker
    The military-political leadership was aware of the fact that "a war with little blood on foreign territory" was nothing more than a propaganda move. Otherwise, there would be no plans to evacuate industry from the western regions of the country up to Moscow. And the evacuation itself was much better than it was during the First World War.

    alas .. Judging by the plans of the NPO and the General Staff, this was their main postulate (((
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 44
    -10%
    Quote: Bar1
    The beginning of the war June 22 EQUALITY day, the Slavic holiday of Ivan Kupala, when Napoleon crossed the borders

    Well, actually, Hitler originally dreamed - in July 40th - to attack on MAY 22-25))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 46
    -12%
    Quote: OloxDbahax
    Stalin knew that there would be a clash with the Wehrmacht.
    But he was "blinded" by the might of the Red Army. The first doctrine was then - "we will beat the enemy on his territory."
    When the enemy attacked and went in a thin wedge to Kiev. Instead of cutting off this wedge, the Headquarters issued directive N3 - with the two main armies to attack the enemy's main force deep into its rear, but not the enemy's wedge. A few days later, our two main armies were completely defeated. And the enemy expanded his blow.
    Instead, the Headquarters had to issue a directive - "cut off the wedge and dig in." Then they were more or less able to repulse the enemy, thereby gaining time for the retreating forces and the further creation of defensive fortifications on the second and third echelons ...

    at the beginning of the rate are ALWAYS fighting according to the plans of the pre-war and dir. 3 this is the execution of the PRELIMINARY plans)))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 48
    -12%
    Quote: Alexey RA
    "we will beat the enemy on his territory."

    Don't confuse propaganda with doctrine. In the USSR, these were two different, often not overlapping things.


    alas - in the plans of the military, this was exactly the essence of their plans ..
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 50
    -15%
    Quote: AsmyppoL
    On the evening of June 21, tanks were almost not found in the places of enemy motorized corps strikes.

    you are not tired of chasing lies tchvash - how did the Germans deceive Stalin?))
    1. AsmyppoL
      AsmyppoL 12 June 2021 13: 50
      +12
      My articles are for smart people ...
      So try to refute my materials using facts, and not the usual verbal rubbish with which you fill your comments and books ...
      The following materials are well known:
      1) reconnaissance report of the SC intelligence department dated June 22, 1941;
      2) intelligence reports of the PribOVO of June 17 and 21, as well as materials of the district intelligence department as of 18-00 June 21;
      3) intelligence reports of ZapOVO dated June 20 and 21;
      4) intelligence reports of the intelligence department of June 15, with the attachment of the locations of German troops according to the data of RU, PribOVO, ZAPOVO and KOVO;
      5) operational reports of the SC General Staff for June 22 and 23;
      6) maps of the operations department of the General Staff of the Wehrmacht ground forces;
      7) maps and diagrams of the headquarters of PribOVO, ZAPOVO, KOVO and OdVO;
      8) the pre-war diary of the chief of staff of the 3rd Army, on the right flank of which the 3rd Panzer Group was concentrated.
      There are a lot of documents, so show in figures where the intelligence saw motorized corps and tank groups ...
      Don't shake the air. On all sites, Kozinkin's opinion is rated below the plinth ...
      1. ccsr
        ccsr 12 June 2021 17: 55
        -16%
        Quote: AsmyppoL
        There are a lot of documents, so show in figures where the intelligence saw motorized corps and tank groups ...

        You have already been repeatedly explained that divisions are fighting with their standard weapons, and the headquarters of corps and tank groups do not go on the attack, which is why it is important for military professionals to know which formations and how many oppose them, and not which group they are organizationally into. Not to mention the fact that all large headquarters in a couple of hours change their location after the start of hostilities. Why then spend huge efforts to know their exact location, when it is much more important to understand where they will be after moving. The entire German grouping was discovered by Soviet intelligence with an accuracy of one or two divisions, and this in itself proves that our intelligence worked well.
        However, your stupid conclusions on "Wehrmacht shoulder straps" and an illiterate interpretation of intelligence reports have long been refuted, but as they say, not in the horse feed. So lie further, you will not lose anything, however, there is no need to wait for another from the home-grown "historian".
        Quote: AsmyppoL
        6) maps of the operations department of the General Staff of the Wehrmacht ground forces;

        You're lying - you don't have them, because everything that you mentioned was in May 1941, and the main movement of combat units was in June ..
        Quote: AsmyppoL
        The following materials are well known:

        You still distort them in your writing, so there is no point in discussing them with you when you have been repeatedly caught in lying and fantasizing.
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 53
    -12%
    Quote: AsmyppoL
    This was the basis for the directive we received.

    yes well ..))) But Zhukov wrote that they just tried to execute in the FIRST days PRELIMINARY plans))) And if you look at these plans - ALL considerations since autumn - there are everywhere - we attack - in response, naturally - to Lublin and Suwalki)))
    1. AsmyppoL
      AsmyppoL 12 June 2021 13: 55
      +10
      Zhukov is a military man to the bone ...
      Without intelligence data, none of these military men will rush into the attack ...
      You just don't get it ... Well, you are a citizen science fiction writer ...
      And on June 22, the intelligence data were considered absolutely reliable ... Having learned on the evening of June 22 the true situation at the headquarters of the South-Western Front, he only suffered a counterattack for a day. In fact, without properly assessing the situation and not reporting the truth to Stalin, he ditched a bunch of equipment and people ...
      Therefore, the easiest way is to blame a dead person in your memoirs. So often in his memoirs it was ...
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 54
    -14%
    Quote: Dalny V
    Stalin did not know - and could not know the exact date, too many options were offered to him. So I fully assumed that there would be an attack.

    he knew the date)) KNEW))) study)))
    https://liewar.ru/knigi-o-vojne/367-22-iyunya-1941-porazhenie-bylo-neizbezhno-kto-vinovat-utochnennye-itogi-razvedyvatelno-istoricheskogo-rassledovaniya.html
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 55
    -14%
    Quote: Reptiloid
    Well yes! Nobody knew the exact date; reports from different services were contradictory.
    The Russian philosopher Zinoviev, who fought, was awarded and then repressed, wrote that 5 days before the attack, they were given dry rations and everything else.

    it's kind of funny - Stalin did not know the date, but the rations were still given FIVE days before the attack)))
  • Rumyan Totev
    Rumyan Totev 11 June 2021 19: 56
    0
    Read the book by Verkhovsky Ya. G. and Tyrmos VI "STALIN. SECRET" SCENARIO "OF THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR". It gives a very interesting reasoned opinion about Stalin's ignorance of intelligence.
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 56
    -12%
    Quote: Konnick
    the garrison in the Brest fortress was taken by surprise, and the commander of the 67th rifle division, Dedaev, led the troops on June 21 from the barracks to the defensive lines and German planes bombed the empty barracks in Libau.

    like in spite of STALIN he did it?))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 19: 58
    -8
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Quote: Pessimist22
    You can put a portrait of Dzhugashvili in a corner and pray for him, but I consider him a bandit, I have the right to express my opinion, while I still have ...
    Well, go to Europe, there this point of view will only be applauded that you are suffering here.

    paid attention to the lope you instructed the minuses?))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 20: 00
    -10%
    Quote: Pessimist22
    Tell me what is left of the USSR? I know that the communists have become capitalists, and the free workers and peasants of the USSR have become their powerless slaves, correct if I was mistaken.

    is Stvalin to blame for THIS?))
  • VS
    VS 11 June 2021 20: 03
    -12%
    Quote: strannik1985
    More than a hundred divisions will be enough for the first echelon of the fronts

    Zhukov's plans did not envisage THIS)))