Why did Japan attack Russia

160
Why did Japan attack Russia

The Japanese fleet dealt a decisive blow to the Russian 1st Pacific Squadron in order to solve the problem of supremacy at sea with one blow and be able to freely land an amphibious army and supply it. On the same day, the superior forces of the Japanese fleet attacked the armored cruiser "Varyag" and the gunboat "Koreets" located in the Korean port of Chemulpo. The feat of Russian sailors will live for centuries. “We are dying, but we are not giving up!” - the motto of Russians, faithful to the Fatherland to the end.

The Russian army was not defeated


Thus began a bloody war, full of heroism of Russian sailors and soldiers, who had to clear up the mess of pre-war and military mistakes of the tsarist government and high command.



Despite a number of serious defeats on land and at sea, the Russian armed forces were ready to solve the problem of victory over the Japanese Empire. However, behind-the-scenes intrigues and the weak political will of St. Petersburg led to Russia entering into peace negotiations and giving victory to Japan, which was already on the verge of defeat. Japan was facing financial default. Only loans from the then collective West allowed Japan to wage war.

The Russian army, unfortunately, did not have commanders of the level of Suvorov or Bagration to defeat the enemy in a decisive battle. The Russian generals of this era sank greatly. There were too many “parquet” generals, careerists and blockheads. Initiative, determination, and independence were not in honor.

However, Russian troops carried out Kuropatkin's strategic plan, which actually repeated Kutuzov's maneuver in 1812. By the beginning of political negotiations, the Russian army was at the peak of its capabilities, the Japanese army was exhausted, was bleeding and lost its offensive capabilities. The impending offensive of the Russian army could lead the Japanese to a military-political catastrophe. The population of Japan was significantly smaller than the Russian one, its demographic resource was depleted. Japan has already lost its personnel reserve; it died on the battlefields. Russia just “swinged” and was ready to continue.

The fact that Russian troops on land fought more skillfully than the Japanese is also evidenced by the ratio of losses. In the work of V. Shatsillo, L. Shatsillo “Russian-Japanese War. 1904-1905. Data. Documents” it is reported that the Russians lost 50 thousand people killed, the Japanese - over 86 thousand people. IN Stories military losses of B. Urlanis: Russian losses on land - 177 thousand people (31 thousand killed and died from wounds), Japanese - 232 thousand people (58 thousand killed and died from wounds). According to General Kuropatkin: Japan's total losses in killed, wounded and sick amounted to 554,8 thousand people. In Tokyo alone, more than 60 thousand people were buried in the honorary cemetery.

In a report to the Foreign Minister V.N. Lamsdorf, the Russian envoy to Japan, and then the second representative of Russia during the peace negotiations in Portsmouth, Roman Romanovich Rosen noted:

“...despite all the victories won over us at sea and on land, Japan does not have any means that would give it the opportunity to force Russia to conclude peace and pay military indemnity, if Russia preferred to evade this and decided to continue at least passive resistance."

Japan simply did not have the strength to transfer the war directly to Russian territories, even to the CER zone. The landing on Sakhalin could not decide the outcome of the war.

Thus, Japan won not because of its military and economic superiority, but because St. Petersburg decided to surrender. Russia’s Western “partners” simply convinced the Russian leadership to conclude a peace agreement. “Agents of influence” like Witte also played along with them. Japan was generally able to fight with Russia (taking into account the difference in potentials) only due to the full-scale political-diplomatic, informational, military-material and financial support of the British Empire and the United States, as well as the financial international (world capital) behind them.

The Japanese also took advantage of the fact that Russia had weak military-economic positions in the Far East. Petersburg was preparing for war in Europe. Japan was not perceived as an enemy at all.


The weak are beaten


Two main prerequisites for the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 can be distinguished:

1) this strategic weakness of the Russian Empire in the Far East and many missed opportunities to strengthen its position in the Asia-Pacific region;

2) the purposeful work of the masters of Great Britain and the United States to pit Russia and Japan against each other. The Anglo-Saxons sought to knock Russia out of the Asia-Pacific region with the hands of the Japanese, who were used as a “battering ram.” It was also planned to organize a revolution in Russia and weaken the Russian state.

As everyone knows, the weak are beaten, and fools are taught. The history of the development of the Far East by Russians is full of examples of self-sacrifice, heroism and asceticism of some, and carelessness, greed, stupidity and outright betrayal of Russia's national interests by others. While ascetics and statesmen such as Alexander Baranov, Gennady Nevelskoy and Nikolai Muravyov-Amursky created, discovered, built and strengthened Russian borders, others gave away, sold and simply turned a blind eye to the opportunities that opened up.

Russian researchers and devotees founded it at the end of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. huge potential that allowed the Russian Empire to become the dominant force in the Asia-Pacific region, especially in its northern part. Russia owned Kamchatka, Primorye, we received full rights to the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin, the development of the Aleutian Islands, Russian America was underway, Fort Ross in California was our outpost. The Hawaiian Islands persistently asked to be part of the Russian Empire. A Russian outpost was even established on the islands.

In the second half of the 19th – early 20th centuries. there was a real possibility of Korea coming under Russian protectorate, with gradual inclusion into the empire. The Koreans stubbornly refused to submit to the Japanese and looked with hope at the Russians, who were their only hope for a prosperous, independent life. There was a strong “Russian party” in Korea. This opportunity was missed.

The opportunity to establish friendly and even allied relations with Japan was also missed. The Russian fleet was stationed in Nagasaki. In fact, we had a “winter quarters” for our fleet in Japan. In reality, for a very long time there were no particular contradictions between Japan and Russia, and the two powers could become natural allies in the region.

However, thanks to the vague and often simply pro-Western (pro-European) foreign policy of St. Petersburg, when national interests were merged for the sake of the favor of Western “partners,” bureaucratic red tape and the work of “agents of influence” of the West, Russia has lost most of its opportunities in the Asia-Pacific region.

Fort Ross and Russian America were sold. It was a brilliant operation by Russia’s opponents; we lost all positions in America and the possibility of complete control over the northern part of the Pacific Ocean. St. Petersburg was literally “occupied” by a pro-Western group that looked only at Europe and did not care what was happening in the Far East. Nevelskoy and Muravyov accomplished a literal feat when they were able to annex the mouth of the Amur River to Russia. They even wanted to try Nevelsky and demote him to sailor status, but the personal intercession of Emperor Nicholas I saved him.

As a result, for a long time the Far East remained an almost unnecessary outskirts of the Russian Empire. Transport and military infrastructure were not developed. It was only in 1903 that traffic along the Trans-Siberian Railway was opened along its entire length. St. Petersburg did not take advantage of the opportunity to annex the Korean Peninsula and peacefully resolve disputes with Japan.

Russia was drawn into Chinese affairs, including participation in the suppression of the Boxer uprising, the construction of the Chinese Eastern Railway, the lease of Port Arthur, and the clash of Russian-Japanese interests in Korea. This was no longer a gradual expansion of the zone of Russian influence in East Asia, but a chain of strategic mistakes. Russia was deliberately drawn into China and pitted against Japan. A group of businessmen from St. Petersburg, some of them were associated with world capital (the so-called “financial international”), dragged Russia into Korean and Chinese affairs. A huge role in this matter was played by Sergei Witte, the future “Count of Half-Sakhalin” (more details about the destructive role of this figure can be read in S. Kremlev’s work “Russia and Japan: Set off!”).

Bleeding Russia and Japan


England and the USA did everything to pit Russia and Japan against each other. Russia, as noted above, had every chance of becoming the dominant force in the Pacific Ocean, especially its northern part. This did not suit the masters of the British Empire and the United States, who themselves wanted to dominate the Pacific Ocean. In addition, Russia's turn to the East, to Asia, distracted it from European affairs, which also did not suit London and Washington. According to the plans of the Anglo-Saxons, Russia was to play a decisive role in the war with the Teutonic Germans. And then the Russians got distracted from Europe and got bogged down in Far Eastern affairs.

The operation to eliminate Russia from the Pacific Ocean zone was carried out in several stages. First, the “sale of Russian America” operation was carried out. Then they woke up Japan - the mission of the squadron of the American Commodore Perry. The Japanese Empire dozed for a long time in its isolation and had no intention of interfering in the affairs of its neighbors. But Western intervention forced the Japanese elite to follow the path of modernization along the lines of the European powers.

England, and other Western countries, took an active part in the militarization of Japan, the creation of a first-class fleet and army, trained and armed to European standards. The British actually created the Japanese fleet, and the USA and France actively participated in this matter.

The test of strength took place in China, which was then offended and robbed by all and sundry. Sino-Japanese War 1894-1895 ended with the complete victory of the Japanese Empire. China was forced to give up the island of Taiwan, the Penghu Islands and the Liaodong Peninsula forever, and pay a large indemnity, which was used for further militarization.

Russia, Germany and France intervened and took away part of their loot from Japan. Japan was forced to withdraw its troops from the Liaodong Peninsula. Russia concluded an allied treaty with China, acquiring the right to build a railway through the territory of Manchuria. In 1898, Russia received the ports of Port Arthur and Dalny (Dalian) with adjacent territories and water space. Russia also received the right to lay railways to these ports from the CER (South Manchurian Railway). Thus, Russia took Japan’s Liaodong Peninsula captured during the war with China, which led to a new wave of militarization and anti-Russian military psychosis.


Russian poster of the Russo-Japanese War. The Japanese Emperor and his crafty well-wishers (Typo-Lithography by V.V. Kudinov, Moscow, Bolshaya Yakimanka). John Bull (England) and Uncle Sam (USA) push the mounted Japanese Mikado into the abyss. 1904

Attempts to come to an agreement


Japan nevertheless tried to come to an agreement and conclude an agreement with Russia on the division of spheres of influence in Korea and Manchuria. Ito Hirobumi proposed leaving Manchuria for Russia, and Korea was to become Japan's sphere of influence. However, Ito’s initiative did not find understanding in St. Petersburg.

Therefore, the Japanese government decided to enter into an alliance with the British Empire. On January 17 (January 30), 1902, the Anglo-Japanese Treaty was signed, which deprived Russia of the support of any European power. Japan received a reliable rear. Subsequently, Japan received full financial support from England and the United States, without which it would not have been able to fight at all. The pumping up of the military, especially the naval muscles of the Japanese Empire, also continued.

At the end of July 1903, Japan again invited Russia to discuss the Far Eastern issue. Apparently, Japan was still trying to resolve the matter peacefully. The Japanese knew that the potentials of Russia and Japan were very different, in favor of the Russians. Russia could transfer almost the entire composition of the battle fleet from the west of the empire to the east. Relations with Germany were good then. The Russian army was much stronger.

During the Russo-Japanese War, Germany generally acted and behaved as practically the only ally of Russia. Berlin was the only one that benefited from Russia's reorientation to the Pacific Ocean. The enormity of the Russian army simply frightened the Japanese: the Russian army in peacetime - more than 1 million people, the Japanese army - 180 thousand people. These fears were all the more justified because there was still no confidence in their own army. Japanese soldiers were trained by French and German instructors, but the new Japanese army had not yet dealt with a strong enemy. The only asset the Japanese had was a victory over a completely degraded China. It was scary to fight with Russia. The opportunity to reach an agreement still existed, despite all the prodding from Britain and the United States.

In August 1903, the Japanese submitted a draft agreement to the Russian Foreign Ministry. Both sides had to recognize the independence and territorial integrity of Korea and China and support the principle of equality in the commercial and industrial sphere. Russia had to recognize the predominance of Japanese interests in Korea, the Japanese recognized Russia's special railway construction interests in Manchuria. Japan received the right to continue the railway lines built in Korea to Southern Manchuria, until they connected with the CER and a branch of the southern part of the CER to Beijing.

Thus, the Japanese did not demand the abandonment of Port Arthur, but blocked Russia’s economic activity in Korea and limited it in Manchuria. The Japanese gained wide access to Northeast China. Moreover, this was only a project; negotiations could be continued.

Overall, this project was worthy of attention. Port Arthur and the Far East remained with Russia; the Japanese did not lay claim to the Chinese Eastern Railway and its branches. The further expansion of Russia, taking into account all the missed opportunities of the whole century, did not make much sense. We have already received everything we needed. The most important thing Russia had was a naval base in the southern seas and a railway to it.

However, St. Petersburg is escalating. On October 5, Japan was sent a response project, which provided for Russia's recognition of the predominant interests of the Japanese in Korea, in exchange for Japan's recognition of Manchuria as lying outside its sphere of interests. The provision on the exclusion of Manchuria from the zone of its interests did not categorically bother Japan. In December 1903, Japan issued an ultimatum note to Russia, demanding full recognition of its rights in Korea.

"Japan is leading our game"


At the same time, Japan receives an encouraging signal from the United States. On the same day, October 8, 1903, the United States and Japan enter into trade agreements with China. Both England and the United States unanimously “advise” (instruct) China not to be friends with Russia. The US then officially assures Japan that in the event of war, American policy will be favorable to the "Shinto Empire".

Already during the war, American President Theodore Roosevelt would say:

“I will be extremely pleased with a Japanese victory, because Japan is leading our game.”

Quite clearly the anti-Russian game was noticed in Berlin. On January 9, 1904, Kaiser Wilhelm wrote to Emperor Nicholas:

“...God grant that everything goes smoothly and that the Japanese listen to the voice of reason, despite the fierce efforts of the vile press of a certain country. It seems she has decided to endlessly pour money into the bottomless well of Japanese mobilization.”

True, here we need to correct the German emperor. More precisely, “they decided” - England and the USA.

At the beginning of 1904, at the special invitation of the Japanese emperor, the American war minister Taft arrived in Japan, who conveyed Roosevelt’s promise to give Japan military support if France and Germany took the side of Russia. And Japan decided to go to war.

On February 5, 1904, the Japanese Foreign Ministry instructed the ambassador in St. Petersburg by telegraph to stop negotiations and interrupt diplomatic relations with the Russian Empire. On February 6, Japan officially announced the severance of diplomatic relations with Russia. The Russian response to the December ultimatum left on February 3, but was detained in Nagasaki and delivered to Rosen only on February 7.

Back on January 22 (February 4), 1904, a joint meeting of members of the Privy Council and the Cabinet of Ministers was held in Japan, at which a decision was made to start a war against Russia. On the night of January 23 (February 5), an order was given to land an airborne army in Korea and attack the Russian squadron in Port Arthur. January 24 (February 6) the Japanese fleet leaves for combat positions. Formally, Japan declared war on Russia on January 28 (February 10).

On the night of January 27 (February 9), 1904, before the official declaration of war, 8 Japanese destroyers conducted a torpedo attack on the ships of the Russian fleet stationed on the outer roadstead of Port Arthur. As a result of the attack, two of the best Russian battleships (Tsesarevich and Retvizan) and the armored cruiser Pallada were disabled for several months.

On January 27 (February 9), 1904, a Japanese squadron consisting of 6 cruisers and 8 destroyers forced the armored cruiser "Varyag" and the gunboat "Koreets" located in the Korean port of Chemulpo into battle. After a 50-minute battle, the Varyag, which received heavy damage, was scuttled, and the Koreets was blown up.

Formally, Japan declared war on Russia on January 28 (February 10), 1904.


“Varyag” and “Korean” go to battle. January 27 (February 9), 1904
160 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +24
    29 January 2024 04: 06
    Hmmm... almost 120 years have passed, and nothing has changed in Rus'. Same problems, same consequences
    1. +7
      29 January 2024 05: 49
      As they say, “fools and roads”... and there is nowhere to escape from them. Karma...
    2. +18
      29 January 2024 08: 21
      Quote from: FoBoss_VM
      Hmmm... almost 120 years have passed, and nothing has changed in Rus'. Same problems, same consequences

      Even the Neanderthals can be pulled in by the desire to kick the authorities...
      The author cries for Alaska and California, forgetting that even now (even in the USSR or in the Russian Federation) supplying them would be quite problematic.
      And then even bringing money there was already hemorrhoids. Russia has never been a maritime power - like England/Spain/France.
      And Russia also did not know how to stir things up - like Spain during the Conquest or England in India. We have never been able to pit people against each other and organize petty wars for our own good...
      1. +2
        29 January 2024 09: 40
        Why bend it, this power? If it itself is ready to bend. Yes, the forum member noted everything correctly, nothing has changed in 120 years.
        1. +3
          29 January 2024 10: 19
          Quote from: dmi.pris1
          What about her bend,this power?

          Quote: your1970
          to kick

          The difference between the words is very great.
          Do not have no physical ability to fight due to the complete loss of the fleet and to give as much as half of Sakhalin for it is a deflection? Yes, they got involved stupidly and incompetently, yes, they lost everything - nevertheless, through diplomatic manipulations Witte turned from a complete loss to almost zero.



          Quote from: dmi.pris1
          forum member
          he is one of the authors - not a forum member
          1. +3
            29 January 2024 21: 29
            Quote: your1970
            nevertheless, Witte's diplomatic manipulations turned him from a complete loss to almost zero.

            Wow, they screwed up.. The loss of Liaodong, the loss of Manchuria, the loss of half of Sakhalin.. And if you remember that the Japanese built their fleet with Witte’s money.. Thanks to Witte they got involved in this adventure, he leaked this project.
            1. -1
              29 January 2024 22: 36
              Quote: Saxahorse
              Quote: your1970
              nevertheless, Witte's diplomatic manipulations turned him from a complete loss to almost zero.

              Wow, they screwed up.. The loss of Liaodong, the loss of Manchuria, the loss of half of Sakhalin.. And if you remember that the Japanese built their fleet with Witte’s money.. Thanks to Witte they got involved in this adventure, he leaked this project.

              imagine 1945 and Hitler at the negotiations saying “We lost the war to you” with a bang - therefore, as reparations, we will give you Prussia... half... no, well, a quarter... probably... then someday"
              Sakhalin Island at that time was a place so needed by the Republic of Ingushetia - that they were exiled to it as a hard labor punishment. But even Witte squeezed out half of it...
              1. +3
                30 January 2024 00: 08
                Quote: your1970
                But even Witte squeezed out half of it...

                You propose to be proud of the fact that you have not screwed everything up, but only almost everything. wassat
                1. -2
                  30 January 2024 06: 22
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  Quote: your1970
                  But even Witte squeezed out half of it...

                  You suggest proud of because not all of them were screwed up, but only almost all of them. wassat

                  I state the fact that, unlike the military and navy, who were in fact crushed to pieces, the diplomats reduced the loss of the Republic of Ingushetia to almost zero.
                  What could the Republic of Ingushetia, for example in Kamchatka, oppose to the Japanese fleet with landing forces? Show me from the shore?
          2. 0
            15 February 2024 22: 15
            Well, yes, Count Polusakhalinsky is an expression of respect))
    3. +2
      4 February 2024 11: 14
      “Behind-the-scenes intrigue and weak political will” (Quote) is right on point at all times. From the times of beautiful carriages and dresses to 100+ meter yachts and Louboutins. Same. The same ones don't let you win. The Great Victory was when the bourgeois elite was not at the helm in the USSR or when the people themselves undertook to drive out the Poles/French. The kings, fathers, surrounded by boyars and courtiers, wasted everything. Tough leaders under whom the bourgeois swamp was afraid to croak - Ivan the Terrible, Peter, Stalin won...
    4. 0
      April 4 2024 09: 29
      The same “doves of peace” lead to the same thing. Instead of harshly tearing off the enemy for centuries, they begin to signal negotiations and surrender in every possible way. By the way, and probably, Japan’s entry into World War II was based on the elite’s memory of the “victories” of the past. When fighting, fight until the enemy surrenders, and not until negotiations.
  2. +10
    29 January 2024 04: 51
    Quote: Samsonov Alexander
    “Agents of influence” like Witte also played along with them

    Witte signed the Portsmouth Peace Treaty, which was shameful for Russia, but nevertheless, he signed it on Russia’s terms, not Japan’s. We must always remember this
    1. +6
      29 January 2024 08: 24
      It should be noted that Japan was also not happy with this peace treaty and believed that Russia had to pay indemnities to recoup the costs of the war. Considering the unpopularity of the war in Russia and the unrest of the masses, the outcome of the war for Russia was not so bad. Theodore Rooseveld also urged Japan to sign this treaty.
    2. +3
      29 January 2024 08: 35
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      Witte signed the Portsmouth Peace Treaty, which was shameful for Russia, but nevertheless, he signed it on Russia’s terms, not Japan’s.

      If lost total fleet to give up half of Sakhalin - a place at that time suitable only for hard labor - this is diplomatic victory Witte. I got out of the complete w/c.
      If the Japanese fleet came to Vladivostok Khan in the city, they still had enough ships.
      1. 0
        29 January 2024 21: 44
        Quote: your1970
        If the Japanese fleet came to Vladivostok Khan in the city, they still had enough ships.

        There are few ships, another army is needed. And compared to the merged Liaodong, Vladik, frankly, is a so-so consolation.
        1. -1
          29 January 2024 22: 40
          Quote: Saxahorse
          Quote: your1970
          If the Japanese fleet came to Vladivostok Khan in the city, they still had enough ships.

          There are few ships.
          for liquidation all The cities in the Far East would have enough naval artillery to fill their ears + the Japanese could easily land a landing force of 5 thousand.
          It’s unlikely to be captured for a long time, but it’s easy to destroy it.
          1. 0
            30 January 2024 00: 22
            Quote: your1970
            It’s unlikely to be captured for a long time, but it’s easy to destroy it.

            There was nothing to demolish there yet, the population was 29 thousand in the suburbs, and a third of them were foreigners. Vladik only began to grow sharply after the loss of Manchuria, but there was a garrison of 8 thousand.
    3. +5
      29 January 2024 10: 13
      And for these “conditions” he received the title “Half-Sakhalin”?
      1. +6
        29 January 2024 10: 23
        Quote from AdAstra
        And for these “conditions” he received the title “Half-Sakhalin”?

        Yes for these. And if in his place there was someone “poliberastie”, they could give up all of Russia
        1. -2
          29 January 2024 22: 29
          Who should I give it to? To the Japanese? Did they go for it?
        2. -2
          29 January 2024 22: 46
          And let me ask, what kind of “liberal” had Russia in his pocket? So that he would take it like that and give it to someone.
          1. +1
            30 January 2024 04: 14
            Quote: YAHU
            What kind of “liberal” had Russia in his pocket? So that he would take it like this and give it to someone

            The one who has been given the authority to negotiate

            Quote: YAHU
            Who should I give it to? To the Japanese? Did they go for it?

            Do you probably think that the Japanese would refuse?
            1. -2
              30 January 2024 05: 22
              The negotiator cannot give anything away. He negotiates preconditions, which are then verified by his government. Which initially sets him the framework within which he needs to negotiate. You are either too young or monstrously dense.
            2. -2
              30 January 2024 05: 33
              I think they would refuse. They cannot digest such a piece. Well, you think about Russia. Some liberal took it and gave it to the Japanese, and no one objects.
      2. +3
        29 January 2024 11: 00
        Quote from AdAstra
        And for these “conditions” he received the title “Half-Sakhalin”?

        This is about the same as what Ze and Co. would now give to Russia a piece Crimea - without all other territories belay
      3. +3
        29 January 2024 11: 10
        “Half-Sakhalin” is still a nickname.
        But, yes, he received the title of count.
    4. 0
      2 February 2024 10: 27
      Those. Did RI put forward and sign conditions that are shameful for itself? Class! This is how we should fight)))
      1. +1
        2 February 2024 11: 17
        Quote from ivan_zaitcew
        Those. Did RI put forward and sign conditions that are shameful for itself?

        RI did not put forward anything. RI only rejected the impudent demands of the Japanese. And she did it!
        1. +2
          6 February 2024 11: 27
          What did RI do? About Tsushima? Or surrender Port Arthur? RI was defeated. Like it or don't like it!
          1. +1
            6 February 2024 14: 49
            Quote from ivan_zaitcew
            RI was defeated

            After defeat in a war, there are different conditions for peace
  3. +5
    29 January 2024 05: 08
    The superior forces of the Japanese fleet attacked the armored cruiser "Varyag" and the gunboat "Koreets" located in the Korean port of Chemulpo. The feat of Russian sailors will live for centuries. “We are dying, but we are not giving up!”

    In 1946, the magnificent film “Cruiser “Varyag”” was shot, where the cruiser “Aurora” played the role of “Varyag”; the film is still watched today, but for its time it was simply a masterpiece.
    Consecutively - "Varyag", "Aurora" in the role of "Varyag"
    1. +4
      29 January 2024 21: 06
      The film is still watched today, but for its time it was simply a masterpiece.

      Kostya, “Varyag” has officially entered the Golden Fund of world cinema, a masterpiece for all time. Camera work actually revolutionized cinema.
      1. +3
        29 January 2024 23: 14
        Good night, my friend, Luda! love
        I haven’t heard about the gold fund, but there is nothing to be surprised here; I would rather be surprised if this had not happened.
        By the way, few people know that the Aurora was in a terrible state immediately after the war, so with the help of filmmakers and sailors it was restored and put in perfect order.))
  4. +17
    29 January 2024 05: 32
    It is precisely because of such reasoning that they beat us, but in essence they did not beat us, it’s the same thing every time.
    1. +4
      29 January 2024 08: 35
      Quote: Cartalon
      It is precisely because of such reasoning that they beat us, but in essence they did not beat us, it’s the same thing every time.

      Complete underestimation of the enemy, overestimation of one’s own strengths, completely failed diplomacy, etc.
      1. +1
        29 January 2024 10: 14
        Everything you described reminds me very much of something. hi
  5. +9
    29 January 2024 07: 45
    Instead of learning lessons from the country's history and the mistakes that were made, Russia is beginning to praise the bad and denigrate the good.
    Everyone is trying to tear the country apart...
    And this can happen quite simply, because there are fewer and fewer people in such a vast territory, and there are more and more guest workers...
    stop After March 2024 everything will change immediately...
    1. +7
      29 January 2024 10: 28
      Quote: ROSS 42
      After March 2024 everything will change immediately...

      Let's settle for a bottle of my basil moonshine - why won't anything change??
      Quote: ROSS 42
      There are more and more migrant workers...

      The neighbors in the communal apartment of my relatives in Saratov, whose father moved to Saratov in 1989 from Azerbaijan, and they are citizens of the Russian Federation because of this, left the year before last. To Azerbaijan to visit relatives... just in case, yeah...

      So if I sell you a bottle, there will be many fewer guest workers.
      1. +1
        29 January 2024 11: 18
        Quote: your1970
        Let's settle for a bottle of my basil moonshine - why won't anything change??

        First of all, I haven't drunk alcohol for many years.
        Secondly, I do not make assumptions, but only state facts.
        Thirdly, neither you, nor I, nor the GDP decide anything in this world (by and large), Vesuvius helps me.
        * * *
        I was already pleased that VVP stopped coughing during his speeches. I really don’t want anything to happen to him and we again find ourselves on the sidelines of history in Yeltsin’s criminal redistribution...
        1. +7
          29 January 2024 12: 00
          Quote: ROSS 42
          First of all, I haven't drunk alcohol for many years.

          In vain. It has been proven by science and African elephants that occasionally - alcohol is healthy. Moreover, mine is based on basil...
          Quote: ROSS 42
          Secondly, I do not make assumptions, but only state facts.
          - Vladimir Vladimirovich belay belay ??

          Quote: ROSS 42
          Thirdly, neither you, nor I, nor the GDP decide anything in this world (by and large), Vesuvius helps me.
          your point 3 contradicts point 2
          Quote: ROSS 42
          We again found ourselves on the sidelines of history in the “Yeltsin” criminal redistribution...

          I absolutely agree here - New be it communist or capitalist, they will first create chaos. Even if suddenly they are all completely decent people - but this is unlikely (the same experience of 2 redistributions of property in the 20th century)....
          And chaos lasting 7-10 years (as was the case in previous times of redistribution of property in Russia) will ruin Russia. No nuclear weapons will help here.

          We'll have the same bullshit after death, as in the USA now - there is no leader who would be followed unconditionally by at least one percent 60 population.
          1. +2
            29 January 2024 12: 14
            Quote: your1970
            In vain. It has been proven by science and African elephants that occasionally alcohol is beneficial. Moreover, mine is made with basil...

            Elephants (in nature) drink weak alcohol (eat sour, fermented fruits), which is what the body requires.
            Vodka is bitter and not everyone's cup of tea. I like ice cream...
            And I don’t believe in communism...But in our Russia, socialism has gotten in the way of someone’s throats. He (they) takes pleasure in the humiliation and exploitation of other people.
            1. +3
              29 January 2024 13: 13
              Quote: ROSS 42
              .And in our Russia, socialism has gotten in the way of someone’s throats. He (they) takes pleasure in the humiliation and exploitation of other people.

              And this is a redistribution of property...
              Moreover, the redistribution ALL property - not only of Gazprom/Norilsk Nickel but in general of everything. Because otherwise the new NEP will have to be liquidated again power by way.
              Small owners will carry the government’s money in their beaks into their pockets - for this for that for petty patronage....
              And the population will say, “Evona, but Vaska Pupkin, as it was under the old regime, has 5 apartments, and he bought the district police officer, the head of the district council and everyone in the sting.” but we still don’t have any work!! Why is this kind of socialism possible for us - if under it, like under capitalism, we don’t have work??”
              And that's it, try to have small the hosts will end
    2. +3
      29 January 2024 13: 42
      Quote: ROSS 42
      Instead of learning lessons from the country's history and the mistakes that were made, Russia is beginning to praise the bad and denigrate the good.

      Lenin and Stalin learned their lessons. Lenin stopped the Japanese intervention, Stalin returned both Pol-Sakhplin, surrendered to Witte after the war, and the Kuril Islands, surrendered by the tsar himself without war. Gorbachev almost gave Japan the Kuril Islands again.
  6. +14
    29 January 2024 08: 15
    As for the fact that we were not beaten, this is, to put it mildly, not true. Military defeat took place.

    Port Arthur capitulated, and the original goal of the war became distant. Stoessel and other leaders were tried for premature surrender, however, for the sake of objectivity, it should be said that at the time of surrender the city was already under crossfire, the remnants of the squadron were destroyed, their own reserves did not allow a counterattack, the main forts were lost, and there was no hope for an external relief blockade was due to Kuropatkin's defeat.

    Almost the entire Russian fleet died or capitulated, and Japan established complete supremacy at sea.

    There was a smell of revolution in Russia, and the smell was already strong.

    When the king was told that victory was possible, but that serious cash injections would be required, he decided that the game was not worth the candle. There was logic here - even if we took back Port Arthur, which was conceived as a naval base, then the Navy itself would no longer exist and the rivalry with Britain at sea was lost, and the region was completely dominated by the Japanese fleet, which received serious reinforcements from trophies. Even Mikasa's death did not greatly reduce the strength of the fleet.

    In Japan, the economic situation was no better, they had no reserves at all, and the war was fought practically on credit, but military victories had their price. In a long war, Japan could lose or become financially dependent.

    In addition to the objective reasons for the defeat, I would say about bad luck - the death of Makarov and the battleship Petropavlovsk, and then the death of Vitgeft at a critical moment of the battle - a lot could have gone wrong if not for these events.
    1. +3
      29 January 2024 08: 56
      Even Mikasa's death did not greatly reduce the strength of the fleet.

      There was an explosion. But you went too far with death.
      1. +4
        29 January 2024 10: 31
        As far as I remember, it sank, but was subsequently raised. Varyag - died or not? In this case it's the same.

        In any case, not a fighter in that war. Now the ship is a museum, a participant in one of the most famous naval battles in the world.
        1. +2
          29 January 2024 21: 55
          Quote: S.Z.
          In any case, not a fighter in that war.

          The war ended on September 5, 1905, New Style. Mikasa's explosion occurred on the night of the 11th to 12th of the same month.
          So he delayed the war completely...
    2. 0
      15 February 2024 22: 26
      Yes, the Japanese were very lucky in the REV.
      But then they used up their reserve of luck; during WWII they were no longer lucky at all, but quite the opposite
  7. +11
    29 January 2024 08: 26
    It seems to me that just a little more and Japan would have surrendered itself, it looks very rosy. The revolution of 1905 did not arise out of the blue. Samsonism in one word lol
  8. +12
    29 January 2024 08: 59
    There are two main preconditions for the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905.

    There is only one reason - the idiocy of the Tsar-Father and his entourage. Japan is an extremely resource-poor country. And the only place in its immediate surroundings from which it could get coal, timber and iron ore was Korea. No Korea - the end of any plans to create an empire. Naturally, Japan under no circumstances could allow the loss of influence over Korea. The question is - why the hell did RI need to go there, and even so brazenly, in such situations?? Why do we need Korea - there wasn’t enough land? Resources? Population? What was the point?

    Well, okay - for some reason they climbed in. But you had to understand that this is war! No options. Maybe it’s worth preparing for it? Transfer troops, ships, supplies, create base defenses? But no - they climbed in, made a mess, and decided that everyone would wipe it off. Ugh.
    1. +2
      29 January 2024 10: 48
      Why do we need Korea - there wasn’t enough land? Resources? Population? What was the point?

      In tune with the 21st century you write:((
    2. +2
      29 January 2024 11: 56
      Quote: paul3390
      Japan is an extremely resource-poor country. And the only place in its immediate surroundings from which it could get coal, timber and iron ore was Korea.

      I don’t know about iron ore, but Japan is covered by forests about three-quarters.
      1. +4
        29 January 2024 12: 06
        Forest is different from forest... Not every saxaul or palm tree is suitable for industry.
        1. +3
          29 January 2024 12: 23
          Quote: paul3390
          Not every saxaul or palm tree is suitable for industry.

          Saxaul? Aksakal.

          In Japan, oak, beech, cedar, and pine grow en masse. They have their own Japanese species of all these trees, but I don’t think they are fundamentally different from ours.
          1. +5
            29 January 2024 12: 27
            I don’t know what they have in abundance - but for some reason timber was always on their list of priorities. Ore, coal, timber, grub, cotton, rubber, oil, metals such as copper-tin-nickel-other... Yes, almost everything.

            Maybe crooked or small trees grow? Wrong texture? Who cares? The main thing is that they were actively exported.
            1. +2
              29 January 2024 12: 32
              Quote: paul3390
              I don’t know what they have in abundance there

              It is advisable to first find out and then write.
              1. +5
                29 January 2024 12: 34
                And you, as I understand it, are aware? Well, then shed on us, the orphans, the light of your unearthly wisdom. Explain - they exported timber from Korea for feijoa, since they don’t care about their own type? I'll be happy to read it..

                And also - why the hell did Russia need Korean forest concessions... Which certainly does not suffer from the lack of forests.
                1. +1
                  29 January 2024 12: 45
                  Quote: paul3390
                  Explain - they exported timber from Korea for feijoa, since they don’t care about their own type?

                  I do not know. Maybe they were just sorry to cut down theirs.

                  Quote: paul3390
                  And also - why the hell does Russia need Korean forest concessions...

                  Were they needed?
                2. +4
                  29 January 2024 13: 04
                  Quote: paul3390
                  And also - why the hell does Russia need Korean forest concessions...

                  There is a saying. Across the sea, the heifer is half a heifer, and carries a ruble.
                  To carry out logging, it is not enough for the forest to simply exist. We need a way to deliver it to the consumer. And on the Yalu River, which flows into the West Korean Strait, this is somewhat simpler than on the Yenisei and its tributaries, which carries its waters into the Kara Sea.
                  And of course, this forest was not needed inside Russia. But it was highly valued in the foreign market of Southeast Asia.
    3. +3
      29 January 2024 16: 37
      Quote: paul3390
      Well, okay - for some reason they climbed in. But you had to understand that this is war! No options. Maybe it’s worth preparing for it? Transfer troops, ships, supplies, create base defenses? But no - they climbed in, made a mess, and decided that everyone would wipe it off. Ugh.

      "Winter War" with the Finns, no?
      “They threw hats at me” - no worse than under the Tsar?
      Who didn’t immediately allow the troops to be brought up, prepared, secured, and supplied?
      The unfortunate king lost half of Sakhalin - and we received the status of “Colossus with feet of clay.”
      If it weren’t for such a hat, Hitler might have been dissuaded by the General Staff from the adventure of going to the East.
      And this bullshit is to be unprepared to war - it has always been in Rus', it is somehow ineradicable....
      They will always punch us in the face for starters.
      1. 0
        30 January 2024 17: 34
        Quote: your1970
        Who didn’t immediately allow the troops to be brought up, prepared, secured, and supplied?

        Dizziness from success. ©
        Everything possible was done in terms of preparation for the SFE within the framework of the military-political leadership’s ideas about reality. But in reality this was the invincible and incomparable Red Army - and some kind of limitrophe country.
        The question is, what especially prevented our troops from adapting to the conditions of the war in Finland? It seems to me that they were particularly prevented by the previous campaign of psychology created in the troops and the command structure - we will throw our hats. The Polish campaign terribly damaged us, it spoiled us. Entire articles were written and speeches were said that our Red Army is invincible, that it has no equal, that it has everything, there are no shortages, there was and does not exist, that our army is invincible. In general, there have been no invincible armies in history. The best armies that beat here and there, they suffered defeats. We, comrades, boasted that our army was invincible, that we could throw all our hats, there were no shortages. In practice, there is no such army and never will be.
        This prevented our army from immediately understanding its shortcomings and rebuilding itself in relation to the conditions of Finland. Our army did not understand, did not immediately understand that the war in Poland was a military exercise, not a war. She did not understand and did not understand that in Finland there would not be a military walk, but there would be a real war. It took time for our army to understand this, to feel it, and for it to begin to adapt to the conditions of the war in Finland, so that it began to rebuild.
        This most of all prevented our troops from immediately, immediately adapting to the basic conditions of the war in Finland, from understanding that she was not going on a military excursion to win with a bang, but to go to war. With this psychology that our army is invincible, with boasting, which are terribly developed among us, these are the most ignorant people, i.e. big braggarts - we need to stop. This boasting must be ended once and for all. We need to hammer into our people the rules that there is no such thing as an invincible army.
        © IVS

        The worst thing is that even with the forces available in the LVO, the SFV could have won in January 1940. If their actual training had corresponded to the reports that the red commanders sent to the top. And if the planning of the operation was carried out based on actually available intelligence data, and not on the whirlwinds in the heads of the Red commanders. Indeed, in its last assault on the Summa sector in December 1939, the 20th Brigade passed right through the Finnish defense line... and only the lack of infantry prevented the breakthrough from being consolidated.
        1. 0
          31 January 2024 10: 25
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Entire articles were written and speeches were made that our ....... Army is invincible, that it has no equal, that it has everything, there are no shortages, it never was and does not exist, that our army is invincible.
          - hmmm... Joseph Vissarionovich perfectly knew not only RIA, SC and SA of the USSR, but also the RF Armed Forces belay belay lol


          Quote: Alexey RA
          With this psychology that our army is invincible, with boasting, which are terribly developed among us, these are the most ignorant people, i.e. big braggarts - we need to stop. This boasting must be ended once and for all. We need to hammer into our people the rules that there is no such thing as an invincible army.

          Stalin was right as usual - there were no options, but it was a little easier for him - in his time the howl “We abandoned those who believed in us!!” did not stand out of every iron.

          I was always surprised - why did they enter Poland on September 17.09.1939, 10.09? The fact that the government fled became known on September 11.09. That is, enter on September XNUMX and formally everything will be in vain.
          But no, the temporary detention center showed it here too pickiness and precision- 16.09.1939/XNUMX/XNUMX an agreement was signed on the cessation of hostilities with Japan on Khalkhin Gol. So that Germany doesn't remember feel about his ally, Japan, and the need to fight for the company.
          1. +1
            31 January 2024 12: 52
            Quote: your1970
            - hmmm... Joseph Vissarionovich perfectly knew not only RIA, SC and SA of the USSR, but also the RF Armed Forces belay belay lol

            War. War never changes. © smile
            Quote: your1970

            Stalin was right as usual - there were no options, but it was a little easier for him - in his time the howl “We abandoned those who believed in us!!” did not stand out of every iron.

            “If I had the newspaper Pravda,” said Napoleon, “the world would still not know about Waterloo!” © smile

            The state monopoly on propaganda works wonders. But for this it is necessary to limit the population’s reception of foreign propaganda, which was only possible in those days.
            And the state monopoly on propaganda corrupts and disqualifies propagandists. And when the enemy’s propaganda breaks through to wide sections of the population, state propagandists turn out to be powerless to counteract it and continue to mutter according to the canons.
    4. 0
      2 February 2024 05: 35
      Then there was a position, they say, the white gentleman will scatter the yellow macaques in no time. But something went wrong...
      Quote: paul3390
      Well, okay - for some reason they climbed in. But you had to understand that this is war! No options. Maybe it’s worth preparing for it? Transfer troops, ships, supplies, create base defenses? But no - they climbed in, made a mess, and decided that everyone would wipe it off. Ugh.
    5. +1
      15 February 2024 22: 29
      in Korea, like Bezobrazov, he pushed his interests.
      This is how it led to war
  9. +7
    29 January 2024 09: 13
    On the same day, the superior forces of the Japanese fleet attacked the armored cruiser "Varyag" and the gunboat "Koreets" located in the Korean port of Chemulpo. The feat of Russian sailors will live for centuries. “We are dying, but we are not giving up!” - the motto of Russians, faithful to the Fatherland to the end.

    Enough with this myth already. The king started, we can’t stop.

    There was no attack and there was no “We are dying, but we are not giving up.” There was an unsuccessful breakout attempt, after which the ships sank themselves, most of the crews on the French cruiser Pascal, the English Talbot and the Italian Elbe went home through neutral ports.
    Rudnev died peacefully in his village of Myshenki in the Tula province.

    The Japanese raised the Varyag (because for some reason it was sunk in shallow water wink ) and was used for 7 years as a training one under the name "Soya". Then they handed it over to Russia, in 1917 it went to Great Britain for repairs, where it was confiscated and subsequently scrapped, but along the way it ran aground and sank safely.
    1. +4
      29 January 2024 10: 37
      “Enough with this myth already. The Tsar started, we can’t stop.”

      Why the myth?

      They rejected the offer to surrender and went for a breakthrough and battle with superior forces. We were unable to inflict damage on the enemy - that's another matter; they shot very poorly. The signal “I’m dying, but I’m not giving up” is a standard signal raised in such cases. There were casualties in killed and wounded, the ship itself was also badly damaged and was not capable of a second battle. They sank in shallow water - where else to drown without losing people?

      What's the myth?
      1. +5
        29 January 2024 11: 20
        Enough with this myth already. The king started, we can’t stop.”

        Why the myth?

        They rejected the offer to surrender and went for a breakthrough and battle with superior forces. We were unable to inflict damage on the enemy - that's another matter; they shot very poorly. The signal “I’m dying, but I’m not giving up” is a standard signal raised in such cases. There were casualties in killed and wounded, the ship itself was also badly damaged and was not capable of a second battle. They sank in shallow water - where else to drown without losing people?

        What's the myth?

        What is heroism?
        At the meeting after the breakthrough attempt, they decided to withdraw from further battle due to the overwhelming superiority of the enemy. stop

        The crews of the dead Tsushima battleships are much more like heroes, those who did not surrender, of course.
        They fought to the end, it was not their fault that they got a stupid commander.

        In general, the most effective commander of the Russian Fleet over the last 150 years is Fedor Nikolaevich Ivanov. Commander of the mine transport "Amur". He killed two battleships. And who remembers him?
        1. +6
          29 January 2024 12: 04
          Quote: Arzt
          What is heroism?

          Try going out alone against 6 gopniks, then maybe you’ll understand.
          Quote: Arzt
          At the meeting after the breakthrough attempt, they decided to withdraw from further battle due to the overwhelming superiority of the enemy.

          After the battle, the cruiser was incapable of combat, and going to battle makes sense if there is a hope of inflicting damage on the enemy.
          Quote: Arzt
          The crews of the dead Tsushima battleships are much more like heroes, those who did not surrender, of course.

          No one belittles their heroism, and their heroism does not detract from the heroism of the “Varyag”.
          1. +1
            29 January 2024 12: 22
            Try going out alone against 6 gopniks, then maybe you’ll understand.

            Not this way. I was sitting in the house, tried to leave, there were 6 gopniks there. They piled on lightly.
            Oh well...he left through the back door.

            After the battle, the cruiser was incapable of combat, and going to battle makes sense if there is a hope of inflicting damage on the enemy.

            Well, yes. They refused the fight. Reasonable. But not heroic.
            But Kazarsky on the Mercury at one time did not refuse. angry
            1. +2
              29 January 2024 13: 23
              Quote: Arzt
              But Kazarsky on the Mercury at one time did not refuse.

              Kazarsky had a slightly different opponent)
              And slightly different circumstances.
            2. +6
              29 January 2024 13: 26
              Quote: Arzt
              Not this way. I was sitting in the house, tried to leave, there were 6 gopniks there. They piled on lightly

              If the damage to the Varyag is translated into the human body, then it is “slightly” - a leg, an arm were broken and an eye was knocked out.
              Quote: Arzt
              But Kazarsky on the Mercury at one time did not refuse.

              Nobody asked Kazarsky - he tried to escape from 2 Turkish LKs and could not, so he accepted the battle. If he had the opportunity to evade, he would have evaded.
              Of course, there are feats higher than the Varangian - the same Rurik, Donskoy... But, I repeat, this does not negate the heroism of the Varangian crew
              1. +6
                29 January 2024 15: 10
                I think the complaint here about the Varyag’s feat is not the amount of heroism, but too much PR. The average person has at least heard a song about "Varyag". But they don’t remember about “Admiral Ushakov”, “Dmitry Donskoy”, “Rurik” and other heroically lost ships and they are not at all heard of.
                1. 0
                  29 January 2024 17: 00
                  Quote: Alexander Morozov
                  I think the complaint here about the Varyag’s feat is not the amount of heroism, but too much PR. The average person has at least heard a song about "Varyag". But they don’t remember about “Admiral Ushakov”, “Dmitry Donskoy”, “Rurik” and other heroically lost ships and they are not at all heard of.


                  Then let's talk about lies, propaganda and PR, and not supposedly absent heroism. I read several books, some were considered documentaries, about the Varyag’s battle, and even saw a film - there were a lot of lies in all cases.

                  The same Admiral Ushakov, by the way, also did not inflict adequate damage on the Japanese, but died without lowering the flag.
              2. +2
                30 January 2024 17: 38
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Nobody asked Kazarsky - he tried to escape from 2 Turkish LKs and could not, so he accepted the battle. If he had the opportunity to evade, he would have evaded.

                So Kazarsky fought the battle by evading. By skillfully maneuvering, keeping the Mercury out of the firing sectors of the onboard guns of the LK and not allowing the grapeshot fire of the bow guns to approach at an effective distance (EMNIP, uv. Makhov wrote that, judging by the nature of the damage, the Turks fired grapeshot, trying to knock out the crew). I didn’t attack the enemy and expected mistakes from the Turkish teams. And they did it - twice, after which Kazarsky finally broke away from the LC.
                1. +3
                  30 January 2024 18: 48
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  So Kazarsky fought the battle by evading.

                  And a hero who deserves to be remembered for centuries. The monument needs to be restored properly.
          2. -4
            29 January 2024 21: 57
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            After the battle, the cruiser was incapable of combat, and going to battle makes sense if there is a hope of inflicting damage on the enemy.

            Well, this is only in your fantastic articles about the Varangians. You have it even more fun than Samsonov’s. Let me remind you that while Rudnev was negotiating with the Englishman about the sinking, Varyag’s senior officer, Stepanov, was preparing the ship for battle. And the Varyag officers did not see any particular problems in continuing the battle.
            1. +3
              30 January 2024 08: 49
              Quote: Saxahorse
              Varyag's senior officer, Stepanov, was preparing the ship for battle. And the Varyag officers did not see any particular problems in continuing the battle.


              You've probably read a lot of alternative history.

              And you don’t know about at least 11 hits, and you haven’t heard about the damage to the guns, you don’t know about dozens of wounded and killed, you haven’t heard about the damage after the fire, about the list... And, probably, it doesn’t occur to you that , if an intact cruiser hoping for a sudden breakthrough was unable to cause damage to the enemy, then a practically uncombatable ship had even less chance.

              But the forces were more than unequal.

              Let's leave the fact that they didn't know how to shoot outside the brackets.
              1. +1
                31 January 2024 00: 46
                Quote: S.Z.
                And you don’t know about at least 11 hits, and you haven’t heard about the damage to the guns, you don’t know about dozens of wounded and killed, you haven’t heard about the damage after the fire, about the list...

                However, the Japanese, who raised the cruiser, did not discover all these “horrors” invented by Rudnev. A flooded coal pit and a fire in the quarters are all the supposedly “critical” damage received in battle. You are repeating other people's fairy tales invented to justify the cowardly sinking of the ship by Rudnev. (even his team, in addition, who tried to accuse him of cowardice)
        2. +1
          29 January 2024 13: 32
          Quote: Arzt
          What is heroism?


          The fact that they made a breakthrough in front of a superior enemy, accepted the battle, and did not refuse it. After returning, there was no longer an opportunity to fight, I read about the damage, I saw photos - there was a fire on board, there was a list, the ship did not obey the rudders... Taking into account the fact that the undamaged ship could not cause damage to the enemy, what was the point of fighting further ? Even the Japanese recognized the heroism. In fact, the Varyag fought until he lost his combat capability; there was no point in further action. The Korean was not harmed at all, but his combat value was zero initially.

          Quote: Arzt
          They fought to the end, it was not their fault that they got a stupid commander.


          As for the clueless commander, this is most likely not true. The court did not find him guilty; he himself, however, considered himself guilty. Rozhdestvensky went out of order, having managed to give one command about the course. He did not show any particular stupidity, or genius.

          Cupid, of course, is a great guy, but today his captain would be called a war criminal.
          1. -1
            29 January 2024 15: 08
            The fact that they made a breakthrough in front of a superior enemy, accepted the battle, and did not refuse it. After returning, there was no longer an opportunity to fight, I read about the damage, I saw photos - there was a fire on board, there was a list, the ship did not obey the rudders... Taking into account the fact that the undamaged ship could not cause damage to the enemy, what was the point of fighting further ? Even the Japanese recognized the heroism. In fact, the Varyag fought until he lost his combat capability; there was no point in further action. The Korean was not harmed at all, but his combat value was zero initially.

            It's like that. But their actions do not correspond in any way to the PR that developed after that. And they still won’t calm down.
            Did the Japanese recognize it? There's a big question here. Reward from the enemy is always a question. In fact, they encouraged all future opponents in the person of Rudnev. Well done guys, keep going, open the Kingstons and go home. And we will reward you. wink

            As for the clueless commander, this is most likely not true. The court did not find him guilty; he himself, however, considered himself guilty. Rozhdestvensky went out of order, having managed to give one command about the course. He did not show any particular stupidity, or genius.

            It is impossible to call the commander intelligent after such a defeat. Even just adequate. Well, it just doesn’t work out. Simply total destruction.

            Cupid, of course, is a great guy, but today his captain would be called a war criminal.

            This is a plus for you. In our country, violating an order from a superior is worse than dying in battle. Ivanov was not afraid. good
            1. +4
              29 January 2024 15: 53
              Quote: Arzt
              It's like that. But their actions do not correspond in any way to the PR that developed after that.

              Quite consistent. Another question is that the heroes of other ships are undeservedly forgotten, yes.
              Quote: Arzt
              Did the Japanese recognize it? There's a big question here. Reward from the enemy is always a question. In fact, they encouraged all future opponents in the person of Rudnev.

              A completely erroneous reasoning that does not stand up to any criticism. However, I already wrote about this
              Especially absurd in this regard is the view that the Japanese Order of the Rising Sun, II degree, which VF Rudnev was awarded after the war, was awarded to him because Vsevolod Fedorovich "presented" his cruiser to the Japanese. The fact is that in Japan itself at that time the Bushido code was still cultivated, from the point of view of which such a “gift” would be regarded as a black betrayal. Traitors, of course, can pay the agreed “30 of Srebrenics”, but now reward them with the Second Order of the Empire (the first was the Order of the Chrysanthemum, and the Order of Pavlonia was not a separate award at that time - the Order of the Rising Sun moved to third place) no one, of course, would not. After all, if they were awarded a traitor, then how did the other gentlemen of this order react to this? It would be a mortal insult for them, and they are taken very seriously in Japan.

              Quote: Arzt
              It is impossible to call the commander intelligent after such a defeat.

              Well, yes, so what if he could no longer command after less than an hour of battle, when the squadron had not yet been defeated. Probably, if they had killed him then, you would have been indignant even then: why didn’t he lead through a spiritualistic saucer, damned one! laughing
              1. +2
                29 January 2024 16: 26
                Well, yes, so what if he could no longer command after less than an hour of battle, when the squadron had not yet been defeated. Probably, if they had killed him then, you would have been indignant even then: why didn’t he lead through a spiritualistic saucer, damned one! laughing

                Yes, he failed everything in the first place. Even before the first shot. And then the leadership style worked.

                A typical Christmas "paralyzer", one of those that closes everything on itself. I've seen enough of these in my time. Knock out this link and everything will fall apart.
                1. +2
                  29 January 2024 16: 34
                  Quote: Arzt
                  A typical Christmas "paralyzer", one of those that closes everything on itself.

                  OK, then, obviously, it won’t be difficult for you to give an example of equally proactive actions taken by one of Rozhestvensky’s subordinates, the commander of the battleship “Alexander III” Bukhvostov. Both flagships were killed (Bukhvostov did not know that Felkersam died before the battle), and he, lacking initiative, turns towards the enemy, trying to pass between Togo’s battleships and Kamimura’s cruisers. And it creates an extremely unpleasant situation for the Japanese, from which they emerge by turning away and moving away from the Russian squadron at all times.
                  Surely maritime history is replete with such incidents, and you will now tell us about them.
                  1. +2
                    29 January 2024 17: 11
                    OK, then, obviously, it won’t be difficult for you to give an example of equally proactive actions taken by one of Rozhestvensky’s subordinates, the commander of the battleship “Alexander III” Bukhvostov. Both flagships were killed (Bukhvostov did not know that Felkersam died before the battle), and he, lacking initiative, turns towards the enemy, trying to pass between Togo’s battleships and Kamimura’s cruisers. And it creates an extremely unpleasant situation for the Japanese, from which they emerge by turning away and moving away from the Russian squadron at all times.
                    Surely maritime history is replete with such incidents, and you will now tell us about them.

                    I won't tell you. A typical situation, loss of control, then who knows what, because there was no plan for this. Initiative people take initiative, passive people become passive.
                    The conductor was killed, and there was no one to pick up the baton.
                    1. +2
                      29 January 2024 17: 42
                      Quote: Arzt
                      I won't tell you.

                      And if you don’t tell, maybe we shouldn’t blame Rozhdestvensky’s commanders for lack of initiative?
                      Quote: Arzt
                      because there was no plan for this

                      There was a plan, and it was carried out. By order of Rozhestvensky, the squadron should be led into battle by the next ship after the flagship. At the same time, Rozhdestvensky placed behind him, perhaps, his best commander. And this commander turned out to be extremely reasonable and ready for self-sacrifice, because in theory “Alexander” should not have survived the enemy’s rush into formation.
                      Quote: Arzt
                      The conductor was killed, and there was no one to pick up the baton.

                      Who else was there to pick it up?
                2. +1
                  29 January 2024 17: 05
                  Quote: Arzt
                  Yes, he failed everything in the first place. Even before the first shot. And then the leadership style worked.


                  He forgot how to shoot gunners, forgot how to determine rangefinders distances, did not bring the fleet to Tsushima halfway around the world?
                  Was he preparing the fleet for parades, not war? (almost a quote from the investigation into the causes of the defeat).
                  What did he do that caused Tsushima to be lost?
                  1. +1
                    29 January 2024 17: 14
                    He forgot how to shoot gunners, forgot how to determine rangefinders distances, did not bring the fleet to Tsushima halfway around the world?
                    Was he preparing the fleet for parades, not war? (almost a quote from the investigation into the causes of the defeat).
                    What did he do that caused Tsushima to be lost?

                    This is particular. He set the GOAL incorrectly. That was enough.
                    1. +2
                      29 January 2024 17: 36
                      Quote: Arzt
                      He set the GOAL incorrectly.

                      This goal was set before the squadron and its commander by completely different people. And he could only try to solve a problem that obviously did not have a correct solution.
                  2. +2
                    29 January 2024 17: 35
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    He taught gunners how to shoot, he taught rangefinders how to determine distances,

                    If this were so, then this would be the absolute fault of the ZPR.
                    But the truth is that our gunners did not shoot badly at all, and therefore the rangefinders coped with their duties.
                3. -1
                  29 January 2024 22: 09
                  Quote: Arzt
                  Yes, he failed everything in the first place. Even before the first shot. And then the leadership style worked.

                  Exactly. The cause of the disaster was, first of all, the wild overload of the battleships with coal; all the armored belts went into the water. You have to be fantastically stupid to prepare a squadron for battle like this, overloading warships as much as possible. similar ships in the Yellow Sea, having received no less hits, quite successfully returned to base.
                  Well, Rozhdestvensky finished off his squadron with the very first maneuver, exposing both flagships to the concentrated fire of all Japanese ships.

                  Anyone, any naval officer at all, would have conducted the battle much better. Alas, it’s a Russian tradition that only the worst end up at the top, albeit stupid but loyal sycophants.
                  1. +1
                    30 January 2024 08: 59
                    “Exactly so. The cause of the disaster was, first of all, the wild overload of battleships with coal,”

                    There was such a theory, completely debunked. It is not seriously considered as the main reason for defeat; someone deceived you.

                    Quote: Saxahorse
                    Well, Rozhdestvensky finished off his squadron with the very first maneuver, exposing both flagships to the concentrated fire of all Japanese ships.


                    Actually, Togo maneuvered more...

                    The reasons for the defeat - more precisely, the defeat - were best said by the members of the commission to investigate these reasons - the Japanese were preparing for war, and we were preparing for the highest reviews. They shot poorly, maneuvered poorly, controlled fire poorly - that is, they were completely unprepared for modern squadron combat.

                    A systemic error, not a personal one.
                    1. -1
                      31 January 2024 00: 51
                      Quote: S.Z.
                      There was such a theory, completely debunked. It is not seriously considered as the main reason for defeat; someone deceived you.

                      Debunked by whom, Andrey from Chelyabinsk? laughing
                      The monstrous overload, right down to the coal on the battery deck, was confirmed, including in court. The ships were not combat-ready at the start of the battle; one could only wonder how long the Borodino crew could hold out under such an overload.
              2. -1
                29 January 2024 17: 23
                Quote: Arzt
                Did the Japanese recognize it? There's a big question here. Reward from the enemy is always a question. In fact, they encouraged all future opponents in the person of Rudnev.

                A completely erroneous reasoning that does not stand up to any criticism. However, I already wrote about this
                Especially absurd in this regard is the view that the Japanese Order of the Rising Sun, II degree, which VF Rudnev was awarded after the war, was awarded to him because Vsevolod Fedorovich "presented" his cruiser to the Japanese. The fact is that in Japan itself at that time the Bushido code was still cultivated, from the point of view of which such a “gift” would be regarded as a black betrayal. Traitors, of course, can pay the agreed “30 of Srebrenics”, but now reward them with the Second Order of the Empire (the first was the Order of the Chrysanthemum, and the Order of Pavlonia was not a separate award at that time - the Order of the Rising Sun moved to third place) no one, of course, would not. After all, if they were awarded a traitor, then how did the other gentlemen of this order react to this? It would be a mortal insult for them, and they are taken very seriously in Japan.

                Japanese bushido is for the Japanese. Does not apply to gaijin. laughing

                There are several factors here. And the fact that he sank his ship, and to show pseudo-respect for the enemy, such as what a strong opponent they fought, but most importantly, I think what’s above. The bad example was promoted.
                You understand that a Japanese would never accept the order under such circumstances. stop
                1. +2
                  29 January 2024 17: 45
                  Quote: Arzt

                  Japanese bushido is for the Japanese. Does not apply to gaijin.

                  The awarding of a gaijin by the Japanese Order applies to the Japanese.
                  Quote: Arzt
                  The bad example was promoted.

                  Questions of faith are sacred to me
            2. +2
              29 January 2024 15: 58
              Quote: Arzt
              But their actions do not correspond in any way to the PR that developed after that.


              We are not talking about PR, we are talking about a feat, real, not fictitious. But it was a feat.

              Quote: Arzt
              It is impossible to call the commander intelligent after such a defeat. Even just adequate. Well, it just doesn’t work out. Simply total destruction.


              The defeat is total, but it is an indicator of the total weakness of the fleet, and not the stupidity of the naval commander. Kutuzov was completely defeated at Austerlitz. We don't call him stupid.

              In not a single serious work have I seen accusations of any fatally incorrect orders of Rozhdestvensky. By the way, we talked above about the fact that Varyag was unable to inflict a lesson on the enemy - and at Tsushima, our fleet not only lost, but also failed to inflict significant damage - is it Rozhdestvensky’s fault that they did not know how to shoot?

              Quote: Arzt
              This is a plus for you. In our country, violating an order from a superior is worse than dying in battle. Ivanov was not afraid


              Ivanov acted with the permission of Vitgeft. Responsibility was shared.
              1. +3
                29 January 2024 16: 20
                Ivanov acted with the permission of Vitgeft. Responsibility was shared.

                Not. Vitgeft authorized the staging in its territorial waters, within an 8-mile zone.
                Ivanov posted in neutral, 11 miles, along the daily route of the Japanese. Kind of lost in the fog. wink

                The commander of 1TOE even tried to refuse to introduce F.N. Ivanov to the St. George Cross due to the fact that he formally violated the order on the location of the minefield.
                But he appointed himself the main winner and received a vice admiral. We have the same as always. recourse
                1. +2
                  29 January 2024 17: 19
                  “Ivanov posted in neutral, 11 miles, along the daily route of the Japanese. Like he got lost in the fog.”

                  I think this is such an ordinary game - Ivanov proposed at 11 miles, Vitgeft allowed at 8, understanding that he would place where he proposed, then scolded Ivanov, who violated the order, but... the winners are not judged. In the event of a neutral explosion, Vitgeft would also get it and, most likely, first of all.

                  Vice Admiral? It seems he died as a rear admiral.
              2. +2
                29 January 2024 18: 27
                Quote: S.Z.
                and at Tsushima, our fleet not only lost, but also failed to inflict significant damage - is it really Rozhdestvensky’s fault that they didn’t know how to shoot?

                Who????? Senior assistant junior janitor??
                Switchman??
                Nicely you pushed him away from responsibility, what’s wrong....
                1. -1
                  30 January 2024 09: 01
                  "And who????? Senior assistant to the junior janitor??
                  Switchman??
                  Nicely you pushed him away from responsibility, what’s the matter....”

                  It's not me, it's history. We figured it out and found the reasons. Whether they eliminated it or not is another question.

                  Rozhdestvensky did not create the fleet, but controlled it during the campaign and battle. Managed the topic. what happened.
              3. 0
                29 January 2024 22: 13
                Quote: S.Z.
                our fleet not only lost, but also failed to inflict significant damage - is it Rozhdestvensky’s fault that they didn’t know how to shoot?

                You will laugh, but it was Rozhdestvensky who led the training of the Baltic artillerymen, and in fact the entire fleet, before his appointment as chief of the General Staff. Those. Yes, the fact that the Russian fleet did not know how to shoot is primarily Rozhdestvensky’s fault. wassat
                1. -2
                  30 January 2024 09: 07
                  “You will laugh, but it was Rozhestvensky who led the training of the Baltic artillerymen, and in fact the entire fleet, before his appointment as chief of the General Staff. That is, yes, the fact that the Russian fleet did not know how to shoot is primarily Rozhestvensky’s fault.”

                  Actually, he was the chief of the main naval headquarters, but in a year he did what he did - that’s probably why he knew the real state of affairs and was confident of our defeat.

                  By the way, he was a supporter of the development of battleships to the detriment of other ships, and it seems he was right.

                  However, we are discussing his behavior in battle and on the campaign - claims and mistakes are discussed, but he is not considered the culprit of the defeat, this. rather, the opinion of those who do not know.
                  1. 0
                    31 January 2024 00: 53
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    however, he is not considered to be the culprit of the defeat. rather, the opinion of those who do not know.

                    It was Rozhestvensky who was initially pointed out as the main culprit of the defeat at Tsushima. Including in court. You are too carried away by the fantasies of his defenders.
          2. 0
            29 January 2024 22: 02
            Quote: S.Z.
            In fact, the Varyag fought until he lost his combat capability; there was no point in further action.

            This is wrong. The Varyag did not receive critical damage. Let me remind you that even without a crew and with open seams, Varyag sank for six hours, returned at 12, and only at 18:10. overturned. for comparison, it takes XNUMX hours from there to Port Arthur at full speed. Well, half of the officers (including senior officer Stepanov) refused to sign the cowardly act on the sinking of the cruiser, despite pressure from Rudnev.

            Again, we can recall that in a similar (and even worse) situation, Askold and Novik calmly broke through, also receiving several hits.
            1. 0
              30 January 2024 09: 11
              Quote: Saxahorse
              This is wrong. The Varyag did not receive critical damage. Let me remind you that even without a crew and with open seams, Varyag sank for six hours, returned at 12, and only at 18:XNUMX.


              So what?
              The undamaged cruiser was unable to inflict damage on the enemy, lost part of its crew, up to half of its guns were damaged, a fire broke out, it listed - and its chances of a breakthrough increased? Making a second attempt - to commit suicide? Keep moving forward until you drown? :) At the same time, the enemy had an overwhelming advantage - Asama alone was stronger and practically invulnerable.

              “Again, we can recall that in a similar (and even worse) situation, Askold and Novik calmly broke through, also receiving several hits.”

              What relation?
              1. 0
                31 January 2024 00: 57
                Quote: S.Z.
                Keep moving forward until you drown? :)

                Yes! Suddenly it's called debt!

                Moreover, the chances were high; Varyag himself did not hope to intercept Uriu. Rudnev did everything for him.
              2. 0
                31 January 2024 07: 47
                That's right, a detachment of Nebogatov's ships walked until they were surrounded, and had to surrender, and the high-speed Emerald was able to escape.
                Donskoy, Ushakov, Svetlana fought to the end.
            2. 0
              30 January 2024 19: 23
              Quote: Saxahorse
              Again, we can recall that in a similar (and even worse) situation, Askold and Novik calmly broke through, also receiving several hits.

              There was a problem with the technical condition of the Varyag. Due to its technical condition, the cruiser was only capable of demonstrating.... That's why it was sent to Chemulpo. Well, Rudnev was well aware of the unpreparedness of the artillerymen.
              1. 0
                31 January 2024 01: 02
                Quote: Silhouette
                There was a problem with the technical condition of the Varyag. The cruiser's technical condition was only capable of demonstrating....

                There were no "technical problems" there. The ship underwent dock repairs in the fall, replacing boiler tubes and machine and shaft bearings. During testing, it confirmed the successful completion of repairs, showing 22.7 knots (versus 18 for Asama). From that time on, it just stood in Chemulpo for three months, with virtually no mileage. That’s why they sent him to Chemulpo, reasonably assuming that none of the Japanese cruisers would be able to catch up with him if necessary.
    2. +3
      29 January 2024 13: 13
      Quote: Arzt
      (because for some reason it was flooded in shallow water

      To be objective and honest, there is nothing surprising in this. NOBODY from the Russian command or even the rank and file could even imagine that Russia could lose. Therefore, the ship must be temporarily disabled so that the enemy cannot use it in the near future, but potentially be able to return it to the Russian fleet.
      All this was done.
    3. 0
      6 March 2024 22: 39
      A myth is not a myth, I won’t argue, there was a battle, but in the Japanese military museum, located in the Yasukuni Shrine in Chiede, Tokyo, an entire stand/poster is dedicated to the Russian-Japanese War of 1904-1905. The Battle of Tsushima is not mentioned separately, just like the heroic battle with the Varangian and the Korean. This was the case in 2004.
  10. +5
    29 January 2024 09: 25
    Well, what would drive a Russian squadron “around the world” is not from the fat of the then Admiralty. Only the admirals were old but ostentatiously “fat” at that time, and it was precisely these same admirals of that time who had no concept of how it would be necessary to protect the huge maritime borders of a huge country. It’s good that it didn’t even occur to them then that it was possible and necessary to also hold all-fleet annual naval parades in St. Petersburg...
    And Rozhdestvensky drove the squadron from the Baltic to the Far East, being completely confident that such a naval operation would fail precisely in front of the Japanese fleet and precisely then and precisely there. And all because everything is in accordance with the chain of command. The admirals in the Admiralty loved sycophancy themselves, and they knew that Nicholas II himself and his entire Court loved sycophancy.
    By the way, the question about the lessons of those times is relevant and conclusions have been drawn, as they looked into the water, that without general naval pompous parades in St. Petersburg, in the current conditions, sycophancy alone, well, what would please both the admirals of the Admiralty and the sovereign, is clearly not enough without a parade.
  11. +1
    29 January 2024 09: 27
    Why did Japan attack Russia
    I will quote the words of I.V. Stalin about the reasons for the outbreak of wars in the capitalist world:
    Explaining the essence of the basic economic law in relation to war, J.V. Stalin emphasizes that it is the need to obtain maximum profits that pushes monopoly capitalism “to take such risky steps as ... organizing new wars, which for the tycoons of modern capitalism is the best “business” for extracting maximum profits " (Ibid., p. 181).
  12. +5
    29 January 2024 10: 17
    Surprisingly, fellow citizens, Russia still has a bunch of its own undeveloped territories, and in the early 1900s for some reason it went all the way to Korea, supposedly for forest concessions (there are few forests of its own in the taiga). And this despite the fact that Japan was already resettled, looking for somewhere to dump its excess rice eaters and idle samurai. With more mature predators, such as the arrogant Saxons, and together with the Japs, tsarist Russia, led by the wise father-tsar, set out to plunder China, especially profiting from the plunder of the imperial palace in the Forbidden City (Boxer Rebellion). The loot is still exhibited in Russian museums. It’s good that the Chinese are now, like, friends of Russia and are keeping quiet for the time being...

    At the same time, the king constantly provoked the Japs, who tried to accommodate their surplus population somewhere in the short breaks between tsunamis and typhoons with earthquakes. Retribution did not take long to arrive. It all ended in the unheard-of disgrace of Tsushima (the Japanese lost only 3 destroyers, having captured or sunk almost the entire Russian squadron with its newest battleships). Carraul! And advanced Moscow students congratulated the Japanese Mikado Emperor with a telegram on his brilliant victory (just like now...).

    Before this, the no less shameful so-called happened. The Gul incident - frightened alarmists from the Russian Pacific squadron at night discovered allegedly creeping Japanese destroyers right next to... the British coast in the North Sea. As a result of chaotic night firing with the main caliber “at unknown targets,” an English fishing trawler was sunk and several fishermen were killed. There were well-aimed hits on our own people, and they almost sank the Aurora (they hit 5 shells)...
    And then there was Mukden - the almost defeated Japanese managed to capture more than 20 thousand Russian prisoners and eventually won the battle. And there were many more like that. The heroic Port Arthur helped equalize the total losses in that war with the Nipponese, and even that, despite the stupidity of the Japanese command (frontal attacks on machine guns, a novelty of that time), eventually surrendered. Now they write that Russian revolutionaries, especially the Bolsheviks, are to blame for everything. And certainly not the thieving royal nobles along with the wise generals and admirals.
    Somewhere like this...
    1. -2
      29 January 2024 10: 47
      “It all ended in the unheard-of shame of Tsushima (the Japanese lost only 3 destroyers, having captured or sunk almost the entire Russian squadron with its newest battleships).”

      I think there are two, one of which was previously captured from us.

      The result of Tsushima is still a mystery to me, our fleet performed well in the battle in the Yellow Sea, although it lost it, but it was bad luck, and the Japanese had even greater losses, and neither we nor they lost a single ship. And here - such a defeat against the same enemy, having much greater forces than in the Yellow Sea.

      The reason for the war, IMHO, is the greedy nature of tsarism in general and the specific tsar in particular, as well as him and his advisers, to put it mildly, short-sightedness. And, perhaps, an obsessive desire to achieve superiority over Britain at sea.

      The reason for the defeat - see above and also bad luck.
      1. +7
        29 January 2024 11: 21
        Quote: S.Z.
        The result of Tsushima is still a mystery to me, our fleet performed well in the battle in the Yellow Sea, although it lost it, but it was bad luck

        Vice versa. They shot very poorly, but it was lucky that Togo did not immediately escalate the situation. As a result, they managed to survive until dark.
        Quote: S.Z.
        the Japanese had even greater losses

        Controversial issue. The Japanese ships retained their combat capability, but our squadron ceased to exist as an organized force.
        Quote: S.Z.
        still bad luck

        But in general, there is such a thing.
        1. +1
          29 January 2024 13: 43
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          Vice versa. They shot very poorly, but it was lucky that Togo did not immediately escalate the situation. As a result, they managed to survive until dark.


          In fact, the Japanese suffered more losses than at Tsushima, and there were far more hits; on Mikasa, both turrets did not work, as I remember, and although ours fired less often, they hit more often.

          Quote: Senior Sailor
          Controversial issue. The Japanese ships retained their combat capability, but our squadron ceased to exist as an organized force.


          The Japanese suffered more losses, and their ammunition was running out - and they fired more often, and the reserve on their ships per turret was less. But then Vitgeft was killed, the steering wheel jammed, the Tsarevich fell out of formation - and the end of the squadron’s combat capability.

          On the other hand, even having broken through to Vladivostok, our squadron would hardly have become combat-ready soon, since there were no opportunities for repairs there, as far as I remember.
          1. +4
            29 January 2024 16: 10
            Quote: S.Z.
            and there were far more hits,

            In ZhM, in 4 hours, either 31 or 33 shells hit the main Japanese forces. The lead battleships of 2TOE threw the same amount at the Japanese in about the first half hour of the Battle of Tsushima. In total, about 240 shells hit the Japanese in Tsushima, of which 120 were 120 mm and above.
            Quote: S.Z.
            on Mikasa both towers did not work, as I remember

            Read less fiction :))))) By the way, the failure of 5 Japanese 305-mm guns is a consequence of their shell explosions, not our hits.
            Quote: S.Z.
            The Japanese suffered more losses, and they were running out of ammunition

            The Japanese used up approximately 25% of their ammunition.
            Quote: S.Z.
            But then Vitgeft was killed, the steering wheel jammed, the Tsarevich fell out of formation - and the end of the squadron’s combat capability.

            Long before that moment, the squadron lost the opportunity to break through to Vladivostok due to combat damage. Actually, Ukhtomsky was unable to take command because there was nothing to raise the signals on, and they went unnoticed when hung on the superstructures
            1. 0
              29 January 2024 17: 42
              “In 4 hours, the Japanese main forces were hit by either 31 or 33 shells. The lead battleships of 2TOE hit the Japanese with the same amount in about the first half hour of the Battle of Tsushima. And in total, about 240 shells hit the Japanese in Tsushima,”

              I don't remember all the numbers, and as far as I remember, all the Japanese involved in the battle were damaged - which cannot be said about Tsushima. Probably, due to the fact that there were much more of our ships in Tsushima than in ZhM, you are still right. But for some reason the damage in Tsushima was minor.

              "on Mikasa, both towers did not work, as I remember"

              Read less fiction :))))) By the way, the failure of 5 Japanese 305-mm guns is a consequence of their shell explosions, not our hits.

              I read fiction because I love it, but I try to distinguish it from documentary. So, Mikasa’s non-working towers are, IMHO, a fact. Mikasa was hit by more than 20 large shells, and two commanders were killed there - more were fired at him.

              The guns exploded from the shimosa - that's what I read, but they also hit the towers pretty hard, there were even photos. Mikasa really got it.

              "The Japanese have used up about 25% of their ammunition."

              How many are left in the main battery towers?

              “Long before that moment, the squadron lost the opportunity to break through to Vladivostok due to combat damage.”

              I don’t think that you are right about the damage - indeed, the Tsarevich’s mast was damaged, but the fact that the squadron would not have reached Vladivostok because of this is unlikely; if there had been no battle, most likely they would have reached. True, they would hardly be able to repair it there.
              1. +2
                29 January 2024 18: 36
                Quote: S.Z.
                as far as I remember, all the Japanese participating in the battle were damaged

                Remember wrong. Most of the hits during the ZhM were on "Mikasa" and "Nishin". The rest were almost unharmed. And the biggest damage actually comes from the explosions of their own shells.
                Quote: S.Z.
                Well, Mikasa’s non-working towers are, IMHO, a fact. Mikasa was hit by more than 20 large shells, and two commanders died there

                Two commanders on one battleship?
                This is something new)))
                In general, Ijichi Hokojire survived not only the REV but also the explosion of his ship and died only in 1912.
                Quote: S.Z.
                The Tsarevich's mast was damaged, but the squadron would not have reached Vladivostok because of this

                Ukhtomsky was on "Peresvet"
                Quote: S.Z.
                If there had been no battle, most likely they would have reached it.

                But this is already unscientific fiction!
                1. 0
                  30 January 2024 09: 28
                  Quote: Senior Sailor
                  Remember wrong. Most of the hits during the ZhM were on "Mikasa" and "Nishin". The rest were almost unharmed. And the biggest damage actually comes from the explosions of their own shells.


                  "Almost" does not mean "at all". As for the explosions of its own shells specifically in the ZhM battle, Japanese sources claim that the rear turret was destroyed by the explosion of its own shell, but they admit that more than 20 shells hit during the battle - more than any of ours.

                  "Two commanders on one battleship?
                  This is something new)))"

                  Nothing new - one failed, it was replaced, then another failed. Alas, I cannot name the sources now.

                  “Ukhtomsky was on the Peresvet” - ... on which the spar also failed. And what?

                  "If there had not been a fight, most likely they would have reached it."

                  But this is already unscientific fiction!

                  No more than your statement that they would not have reached it. Even, perhaps, less.
                  1. -1
                    30 January 2024 17: 26
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    "Almost" does not mean "at all"

                    That's exactly what it means.
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    however, they admit to being hit by more than 20 shells during the battle - more than any of ours.

                    Oh really?
                    In "Tsesarevich" - 26
                    "Retvizan" - 23
                    "Peresvet" - 34
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    Nothing new - one failed, it was replaced, then another failed. Alas, I cannot name the sources now.

                    Again. You wrote that there died two commanders. Nothing like this happened to Ijichi Hikojiro, who commanded the battleship throughout the war.
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    No more than your statement that they would not have reached it. Even, perhaps, less.

                    That is, the fact that there was not enough coal on Russian ships is not an argument for you?
              2. +2
                29 January 2024 18: 47
                Quote: S.Z.
                I don't remember all the numbers, and as far as I remember, all the Japanese involved in the battle were damaged

                No. Fuji had no damage, in Yakumo and Asahi - 1 shell each, in Shikishima - 1 or 2 shells, in Kasuga and Nisshin - 3 each. And only in Mikasa - 21-22.
                Quote: S.Z.
                Probably, due to the fact that there were much more of our ships in Tsushima than in ZhM, you are still right.

                In the first 17 minutes of the battle, Rozhdestvensky's lead battleships fired 19 shells at Mikasa. More details here https://topwar.ru/183926-o-kachestve-strelby-russkoj-jeskadry-v-cusimskom-srazhenii.html
                At the same time, only the 3 lead “Borodinets”, “Oslyabya”, and, possibly, Sisoy could shoot at Mikasa, but the Eagle still needed to take its place in the ranks.
                Quote: S.Z.
                But for some reason the damage in Tsushima was minor.

                They were scanty in ZhM too.
                Quote: S.Z.
                So, Mikasa’s non-working towers are, IMHO, a fact

                This is not a fact, but reports from Russian commanders. They saw it that way, and that's normal - in battle it always seems like you hit a lot more than you actually do.
                In reality, only the rear turret was damaged; a shell exploded in its gun barrel.
                Quote: S.Z.
                The guns exploded from the shimosa - that's what I read, but they also hit the towers pretty hard, there were even photos. Mikasa really got it.

                There is an assumption that the shell exploded when hit by a Russian shell, but there is no strict confirmation or refutation. That's why 21-22 shells hit Mikasa.
                In addition to Mikasa, the Asahi had an explosion in the rear turret, 2 guns were out of action, and Shikishima had one gun. All from the explosions of their shells.
                Quote: S.Z.
                How many are left in the main battery towers?

                In fact, I deceived you by accident, my memory failed me. If you take the 152 mm, their consumption was only 21%, but out of roughly 960 305 mm shells, 603 were spent, that is, almost 63%.
                Quote: S.Z.
                I don't think you're right about the damage.

                Believe me, I'm right :)))
                To begin with, Poltava and Sevastopol could only reach Vladivostok without any fight, moving economically - otherwise there would not be enough coal. But after the battle, Poltava had a phenomenal hole at the waterline level, so that even the passage to China was dangerous, and Sevastopol’s speed was reduced to 8 knots. Peresvet returned to Arthur with practically empty pits - that is, so did he. The Tsarevich burned a monstrous amount of coal due to broken pipes in order to crawl to the Chinese - and he could not make a breakthrough. In general, only Pobeda and Retvizan could, the latter with big reservations.
                At the same time, the ships could not bunker in Qingdao - there was not much coal there, and it was impossible to stay in a neutral port for a long time. But even if it were possible, then after the battle Togo would go into the Tsushima Strait and would meet our broken-down battleships along with Kamimura’s cruisers.
                1. -2
                  30 January 2024 09: 43
                  "Rozhdestvensky's lead battleships fired 17 shells at Mikasa in the first 19 minutes of the battle."

                  Yes, the rest were almost not hit.

                  “They were scanty in ZhM too.”

                  Comparable to our damage. Unlike Tsushima.

                  “In reality, only the rear turret was damaged, in the barrel of which a shell exploded.”

                  I guess I need to go back to the original sources again. I can’t say whether you are right or wrong, there are no sources at hand, and memory is an unreliable thing. A bad pencil is better than a good memory :)

                  “If you take 152-mm shells, their consumption was only 21%, but out of roughly 960 305-mm shells, 603 were spent, that is, almost 63%.”

                  And we also need to look at where exactly these shells remained. Unlike casemates, it is impossible to transfer shells between towers. But 152 mm did little harm to armadillos.

                  “To begin with, Poltava and Sevastopol could have reached Vladivostok only without any battle, moving economically - otherwise there would not have been enough coal. But after the battle, Poltava had a phenomenal hole at the waterline level, so even the passage to China was dangerous, and Sevastopol's speed was reduced to 8 knots."

                  Of course, I don’t remember about coal, and I didn’t even think about it - perhaps there wouldn’t have been enough of it, although it was not clear then what they were counting on. Maybe they really wouldn’t have made it due to fuel.

                  However, I continue to believe that the battle in the Yellow Sea took place on equal terms, unlike Tsushima, and ours showed themselves to be very worthy opponents - although the balance of forces in this battle was worse than at Tsushima.
                  1. +2
                    30 January 2024 11: 15
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    Yes, the rest were almost not hit.

                    They couldn’t really hit the rest - look at the diagram, half of the second and third squad were far away and had the enemy on a bad course
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    Comparable to our damage. Unlike Tsushima.

                    Well, read at least something on the issue, the same Polomoshnov, for example, if you are too lazy to read/select the results of hits from the official six-volume book yourself.
                    The Japanese suffered only one, Mikasa, and he was not too seriously, the rest were just slightly scratched. We have only one Victory left scratched, the rest were raked comparable or more significantly than Mikasa.
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    I guess I need to go back to the original sources again.

                    I can send Polomoshnov if you want. The six-volume book, however, also
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    However, I continue to believe that the battle in the Yellow Sea took place on equal terms, unlike Tsushima

                    Until the rangefinders and central fire control were knocked out, the head EDBs in Tsushima showed perhaps the best performance in the entire history of the Russian Imperial Army in combat conditions. In my article I did the timing - a clear relationship can be seen. In general, at VO I analyzed in great detail the battle in ZhM and Tsushima, but if you don’t want to read my articles, take the primary sources.
                    Quote: S.Z.
                    although our balance of forces in this battle was worse than at Tsushima.

                    Quite the opposite - 1TOE had 6 EDBs against 4 EDBs and 2 BRKR (Asama did not join, Yakumo - only in the second phase) despite the fact that 1TOE easily maintained 13 knots of squadron speed until Sevastopol was stocked.
                    And we dragged the old guns to Tsushima and the BRBOs were no match for the Japanese BRBOs
                    1. -1
                      30 January 2024 12: 58
                      “One of the Japanese was injured, Mikasa, and he was not too seriously, the rest were just slightly scratched. We only had one scratch left, Pobeda, the rest were scratched comparable or more significantly.”

                      Mikasa was hit more than during Tsushima, she suffered more. We didn’t hit anyone as much as she did. The number of guns that failed - for various reasons - was also in our favor. And no one sank or capsized. The number of dead and wounded also indicates an equal battle. Unlike Tsushima.

                      “Just the opposite - 1TOE had 6 EDBs against 4 EDBs and 2 BRKR (Asama did not join, Yakumo - only in the second phase) despite the fact that 1TOE easily maintained 13 knots of squadron speed until Sevastopol was stocked.
                      And we brought old guns to Tsushima and the BRBOs were no match for the Japanese BRBOs."

                      They brought everything, that’s true, but the Japanese also had miracles like Chin Yen, they also brought everything they had. And we even had more comparable forces - there were also 6 modern EDBs, and they had 4, as before. They have more armored cruisers - 4, it seems, but their speed is less. But in principle, the firepower was higher than in ZhM. The BBO is, of course, a conditional battleship, but there were still older ones, but still battleships are no worse than Chin Yen.


                      “Until the rangefinders and central fire control were knocked out, the head EDBs in Tsushima showed perhaps the best performance in the entire history of the Russian Imperial Army in combat conditions.”

                      In Yakumo, in ZhM, they hit, according to our information, from 60 cables (it seems), this is an unthinkable distance - however, one cannot draw conclusions about its effectiveness from one shot or from 30 minutes of shooting. The head EDBs did not last long, unlike the LMs.

                      There is no point in arguing with the facts - an unsuccessful breakthrough in the first case and defeat in the second. Even if on the second day of Tsushima Nebogatov had teleported with the remnants of the fleet to China and not surrendered, it would still have been a defeat.
                      1. +1
                        30 January 2024 13: 31
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        Mikasa was hit more than during Tsushima

                        Well, if 21-22 is more than 31...
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        We didn’t hit anyone as much as she did.

                        Peresvet - 34 minimum, Poltava - 25, Tsarevich - 24, Retvizan - 23. In Mikasa, I remind you, 21-22
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        And no one sank or capsized.

                        In fact, the similarities between ZhM and Tsushima are colossal. The battle in ZhM is divided into 2 phases - in the first, the Japanese danced at long distances and therefore there were not a large number of hits. And in the second phase they got into a clinch, and, as in Tsushima, knocked out both of our flagships in an hour.
                        Peresvet suffered very similar damage to Oslyabya, but was probably better built, which is why it did not die.
                        https://topwar.ru/172939-o-prichinah-gibeli-jeskadrennogo-bronenosca-osljabja.html
                        https://topwar.ru/173375-dva-bogatyrja-pochemu-osljabja-pogib-v-cusime-a-peresvet-ucelel-pri-shantunge.html
                        But the Tsarevich anticipated Suvorov’s fate and went out of action with the squadron commander who was out of action. Only Rozhdestvensky was seriously wounded, and Vitgeft was killed
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        however, the Japanese also had miracles like Chin Yen

                        Who practically did not participate in the battle - only towards the end. And he hasn’t gone anywhere in Tsushima either
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        And we even had more comparable forces

                        Less
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        there were also 6 modern EDBs, and they had 4, as before

                        Sorry, but if you consider Oslyabya a full-fledged EDB, then in ZhM we had 6 EDBs versus 4 Japanese
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        The BBO is, of course, a conditional battleship, but there were still older ones, but still battleships are no worse than Chin Yen.

                        Only Ian was not in the ranks - and the BRBO were forced to.
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        In Yakumo, in ZhM, they hit, according to our information, from 60 cables (it seems), this is an unthinkable distance

                        In reality - much lower; at the moment of impact, the distance between Yakumo and the trailing EDBs did not exceed 40 kbt
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        The head EDBs did not last long, unlike the LMs.

                        Yes, about the same.
                        Quote: S.Z.
                        There is no point in arguing with the facts - an unsuccessful breakthrough in the first case and defeat in the second.

                        You can argue with the conclusions you draw based on these facts
                2. +1
                  30 January 2024 17: 44
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  To begin with, Poltava and Sevastopol could only reach Vladivostok without any fight, moving economically - otherwise there would not be enough coal.

                  Moreover, economically peacetime - when you can keep under steam only the number of boilers that ensures this move.
                  I immediately remember the well-known calculations from the Diana, when economically the coal reserves are enough to reach Saigon, but not enough to reach Vladivostok. Because you can go to the south with parts of the boilers, and to the north - only with all the ones introduced, because there may not be time to raise steam at the sight of the enemy. wink
                  1. +1
                    30 January 2024 18: 49
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    Moreover, the economic progress of peacetime

                    Perfectly fair remark
          2. +2
            29 January 2024 17: 27
            Quote: S.Z.
            In fact, the Japanese suffered more losses than at Tsushima

            No. According to various sources, Japanese losses during the ZhM ranged from 208 to 260 killed and wounded.
            At Tsushima, about 700 people were killed and wounded.
            My colleague Andrey wrote to you about the number of hits.
            Quote: S.Z.
            the ammunition was running out - and they fired more often, and the reserve on their ships per tower was less.

            Yes. Our battleships have 60 main battery shells per barrel, the Japanese have 80.
            Quote: S.Z.
            On the other hand, even having broken through to Vladivostok, our squadron would hardly have become combat-ready soon

            She just wouldn't get there
        2. +1
          29 January 2024 22: 17
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          Vice versa. They shot very poorly, but it was lucky that Togo did not immediately escalate the situation. As a result, they managed to survive until dark.

          "On the contrary" is just the opposite wassat Anyone who is anyone should know that Togo escalated from the first minutes of the battle, reducing the distance to a minimum and in a matter of minutes, without retaliation, shooting both flagships of Rozhdestvensky’s squadron. But then, yes, he increased the distance and began to slowly finish off the squadron that was left without control.
          1. +2
            30 January 2024 00: 15
            Quote: Saxahorse
            Togo escalated the situation from the first minutes of the battle, reducing the distance to a minimum and in a matter of minutes, without retaliation, shot both flagships of Rozhdestvensky’s squadron.

            But the conversation was about the Battle of the Yellow Sea.
            1. 0
              30 January 2024 00: 25
              Quote: Senior Sailor
              But the conversation was about the Battle of the Yellow Sea.

              But I couldn’t understand this from your answer; the question was about Tsushima. smile
              1. +2
                30 January 2024 00: 30
                Quote: Saxahorse
                I couldn't understand

                This happens to you)
                Colleague wrote
                Quote: S.Z.
                our fleet has shown itself not bad in battle in Yellow sea

                I replied
                Quote: Senior Sailor
                Vice versa. They shot a lot poorly, but it was lucky that Togo did not immediately escalate the situation.

                Just as it was in ZhM
  13. -3
    29 January 2024 10: 42
    Russian researchers and devotees founded it at the end of the 18th - first half of the 19th centuries. huge potential that allowed the Russian Empire to become the dominant force in the Asia-Pacific region, especially in its northern part.

    I hope everyone remembers the heroic defense of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. Do you know what happened then? The fortress was razed, due to the end of the Crimean War, we lost our base. The sale of Fort Ross and California was at gunpoint by British guns, if anything.
    1. +5
      29 January 2024 11: 23
      Quote: Not the fighter
      The sale of Fort Ross and California was at gunpoint by British guns, if anything.

      Oh really!
      In 1841 year?
    2. +3
      29 January 2024 13: 19
      Quote: Not the fighter
      The fortress was razed, due to the end of the Crimean War, we lost our base.

      But they acquired the Primorsky Territory. And the base can always be rebuilt.
    3. +1
      29 January 2024 13: 55
      Quote: Not the fighter
      The fortress was razed, due to the end of the Crimean War, we lost our base.

      I.V. Stalin built a good base in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and returned the Kuril Islands and Port Arthur. The main thing is not to let the liberals from Yabloko and Parnassus into power, and then there will be no one to lose the Kuril Islands or Crimea.
  14. +4
    29 January 2024 17: 03
    Witte is an agent of influence. Russia and Japan could agree, Manchuria for us, and Korea for the Japanese, only Russia refused, but the Anglo-Saxons are to blame!
    Just great.
    1. +3
      29 January 2024 20: 57
      Quote: RondelR
      Witte is an agent of influence. Russia and Japan could agree, Manchuria for us, and Korea for the Japanese, only Russia refused, but the Anglo-Saxons are to blame!
      Just great.

      You have almost the only comment on the topic of the article, and indeed it is. good
      It can be added that, on Witte’s initiative, Russia undertook to pay indemnity to Japan instead of China, sort of in gratitude for Liaodong. The Japanese used this money to build their fleet. Moreover, Witte paid the Japanese first, without the slightest delay, but his fleet was always last in line for money, although they understood that it was needed against the Japanese. That’s why they were two years late with their battleships.
      1. 0
        29 January 2024 21: 48
        We wouldn't be late.
        And these would end up on the seabed, or in captivity. hi
        1. 0
          29 January 2024 21: 53
          Quote: Maxim G
          We wouldn't be late.
          And these would end up on the seabed, or in captivity.

          If they had not been late, the Japanese simply would not have decided to start a war. Because the double superiority of the RI fleet was shining. And even without them, if they had concentrated the available forces in a timely and thoughtful manner, Togo is unlikely to have decided on this adventure. We still had more ships.
          1. 0
            29 January 2024 21: 55
            I doubt it.
            The Chinese were beaten without having any battleships at all.
            1. +2
              29 January 2024 22: 21
              Quote: Maxim G
              The Chinese were beaten without having any battleships at all.

              But they had more ships, larger and more modern ones, than the Chinese. At the same time, we realized that without armadillos it would be difficult. smile
              1. 0
                30 January 2024 13: 33
                Quote: Saxahorse
                But they had more ships, larger and more modern ones, than the Chinese

                Were there no other sources of victory?
                1. 0
                  31 January 2024 01: 05
                  Quote: Maxim G
                  Were there no other sources of victory?

                  Was this really a victory? The Chinese battleships left heavily plucked, but undefeated. smile
                  1. +1
                    31 January 2024 07: 43
                    Lose many more people, lose 5 ships, do not show initiative until the end of the war.
                    Perhaps yes.
                    1. +1
                      31 January 2024 13: 09
                      Quote: Maxim G
                      do not show initiative until the end of the war.

                      Here you are right. The Chinese themselves admitted defeat and made no further attempts to reverse the situation.
  15. 0
    29 January 2024 20: 40
    The article is certainly interesting and reflects the real reasons and features of that war. On my own behalf, I would just like to add that the Russian Empire was forced to a hasty conclusion of peace by the internal situation. The revolutionary movement grew, the “small victorious war” (as it was intended) turned into a serious conflict with large losses and reputational costs. Tsarism was unable to fight on the internal and external fronts at the same time. And in the army itself, unrest and unrest began. Surrender on the external front was necessary to quell internal unrest. This is the main reason for the Porsmouth Agreement.
    1. 0
      2 February 2024 12: 19
      It’s good that things aren’t like that with us now!
      We are victoriously driving the enemy into the distant Polish lands. Every day we move forward!
      And our smartest and brightest leadership has 2-3 backup plans to defeat the enemy with cunning and military tactics!
      And our Foreign Ministry repeats at every press conference: “we do not refuse negotiations,” i.e. There is already a plan ready - a shameful peace for the enemy and a victorious one for us!
  16. 0
    29 January 2024 22: 53
    The Russian army, unfortunately, did not have commanders of the level of Suvorov or Bagration to defeat the enemy in a decisive battle. The Russian generals of this era sank greatly. There were too many “parquet” generals, careerists and blockheads. Initiative, determination, and independence were not in honor.

    This is just about today
  17. +4
    29 January 2024 23: 37
    I laughed heartily at the article))
    Although I stopped reading about halfway through...
    Pearls that made my day:
    1. "..Japan lost 58 people killed and died from wounds.." And further that .. “000 people are buried in the honorary cemetery near Tokyo alone...” This is apparently 60 thousand. of those 000 thousand.
    2. The incomparable statement that “.. Japan was on the verge of defeat...”. There are simply no comments here.
  18. 0
    30 January 2024 00: 15
    In my opinion, the author professes some strange, I would say, overly popular version of the view on the history of the Fatherland. If only...
    Even decades of Soviet power, with its unprecedented successes in economics and social policy, were not enough to truly develop and equalize Russian Siberia and the Far East with the European part of the country. Whatever the hell Russian Alaska and Hawaii are in now, I’m afraid to even imagine.
    1. +4
      30 January 2024 09: 35
      This is Samsonov. This is normal for him.
  19. +2
    30 January 2024 12: 23
    However, Russian troops carried out Kuropatkin's strategic plan, which actually repeated Kutuzov's maneuver in 1812.


    Kuropatkin's plan is to shamefully screw up all the battles in which he participated and retreat so far where Japan was not even going to advance? But there’s no need to drag Kutuzov into this...

    The fact that Russian troops on land fought more skillfully than the Japanese is also evidenced by the ratio of losses.


    Does the ratio of captured and lost territories tell you anything? What about the ratio of sunk and captured ships?
    And yes, the loss ratio, of course, also says a lot. For example, about how one must manage to lose battles, having a multiple superiority in numbers and the ratio of losses in one’s favor... Well, you have to try! And you compare such a “talented” military leader with Kutuzov...
  20. +2
    30 January 2024 14: 26
    Another conspiracy against Russia. What did Russia do to avoid the Russo-Japanese War?
    And we are proud that Japan has captured little, the world is on Russian terms, recognizing that Japan is exhausted. What if the Japanese weren't so exhausted?
  21. 0
    6 February 2024 16: 00
    Oh, how I hate conspiracy theories.
  22. +1
    7 February 2024 11: 42
    Oh my God! Well, how much straw can you chew!
    The very start of the ground operation meant losing the war. In general, to understand what happened, you need to realize that it was a 100% commercial war, in which the interests of the state were intertwined - the creation of a cheap grain export corridor and the private interests of the royal family in Korea.
    The Japanese would have been quite willing to take into account Russian interests in China, but were not ready to give up Korea.
    Moreover, this war, even if it ended victoriously, and this was quite possible, horseradish alone would not have led to the creation of the required trade route.
    Let's look at the map. In the south is Shanghai with the British, in the north is Japan itself. A couple of armed steamships are enough for insurance rates for transportation from Dalny to skyrocket.
    There was no problem in agreeing on everything with Japan, especially considering the traditionally friendly relations between the countries.
    The reason for the defeat also lies on the surface - an extremely ineffective management system for both the state in general and the maritime department in particular. For details, please contact our Rafail Mikhalych.
    To put it simply, they behaved extremely boorishly, and did not seriously prepare for war. Elementary acceleration of the completion of the Borodintsev and transferring them to the theater of operations would make the likelihood of an attack by Japan extremely low.
    I send those who like to splash saliva to the aforementioned Melnikov.
  23. 0
    April 12 2024 13: 52
    That’s right, the Bolsheviks shot Nikolasha, but they don’t teach these lessons