To take revenge on neighbors and avoid participation in the meat grinder of war - Bulgaria in WWII

120
To take revenge on neighbors and avoid participation in the meat grinder of war - Bulgaria in WWII

The part of Europe where Bulgaria is located was hit particularly hard by the steamroller of World War II. Its neighbors in the Balkans suffered enormous losses. Greece lost 800 people (mostly victims of famine caused by the occupation of the country by German, Italian and Bulgarian invaders); Romania lost more than 000 (mostly soldiers killed at the front); Yugoslavia – about 500 million (mostly killed by terror of the occupiers and local Nazis).

The topic of Bulgaria in WWII is of interest due to its ambiguity, which allows for various interpretations. There are publications in which this topic is presented with such bias that their style can be described by the term "hype". The term should be understood not as a combination of hi + pathos, but as a fusion of hype + pathos, since the style it designates combines their features. This style is brought closer to hype by manipulations with history – some of its moments are emphasized, but others are hushed up, which as a result leads to a distortion of the overall complex picture. An example of such a distortion: focusing on a detachment of 700 Bulgarians that fought several battles against our army at the very end of the war, while ignoring the fact that from September 1944 on our side the Bulgarian army, at its peak reaching 300 people, fought.



The relevance of the topic is also facilitated by the fact that it can be found parallels with the history of the USSR in WWII. In this history, too, there are moments that have become objects of both external and, to some extent, internal hype. This is especially true of the Soviet-German non-aggression pact and subsequent cooperation.

prehistory


Bulgaria's policy in WWII was largely determined by its relations with neighboring countries. Relations with them were spoiled by a conflict over disputed territories. Moreover, Bulgaria was the losing party in this conflict. In 1913, in the Second Balkan War, its neighbors (Serbia, Greece, Romania, Turkey) seized lands that the Bulgarians considered their own.

The desire to regain lost lands, the bitterness against neighboring countries, which were invaders for the Bulgarians, led Bulgaria to enter WWI on the German side in 1915. The Germans pledged to help return the territories captured by their neighbors. And at first they succeeded. But in 1918, like Germany, Bulgaria found itself on the losing side of WWI. But as a result of the defeat, Germany did not lose its own German regions. But Bulgaria again lost lands that were ancestral to it, lands that had been Bulgarian since the very formation of Bulgaria and populated mainly by Bulgarians.

The Bulgarians were left with the pain of losses; regaining the lost lands was their national aspiration. But they did not plan to fight for this in Bulgaria. Apparently, after the catastrophes of the 2nd Balkan and 1st World Wars, the Bulgarians were very cautious about war.

After WWI, Bulgaria's neighbors formed an alliance (the Little Entente) directed against Bulgaria, with the goal of preserving the post-war borders – that is, preserving their conquests. But in the second half of the 1930s, the Little Entente fell apart, since participation in the alliance began to threaten a clash not with Bulgaria, but with a strengthened Germany. Rapprochement with the latter was a natural thing for the Bulgarian leadership for both foreign policy and economic reasons. In 1939, two-thirds of Bulgarian trade was with Germany.

In the summer of 1940, the situation in Europe changed dramatically. France dropped out of the ranks of the great powers, Germany assumed the position of European hegemon. One of the consequences was the isolation of Romania. In 1913, this country seized the vast territory of southern Dobrudja from Bulgaria. Germany took the side of the Bulgarians in their territorial dispute with Romania. In September 1940, a demand from Berlin forced the Romanians to return southern Dobrudja to Bulgaria.

Since autumn 1940, Germany has been expanding into the Balkans. The final goal was Greece. But Greece had to be reached through other countries. Hungary and Romania quickly agreed to let German troops pass through their territory. In October, Berlin demanded the same from Bulgaria along with an alliance treaty. In November 1940, the USSR proposed that Bulgaria enter into an alliance with it.

The Bulgarian leadership rejected the Soviet proposal. They did not reject the German proposal, although they did not accept it right away. Germany repeated it as an ultimatum; a large German army was concentrated near the Bulgarian border. The Germans also guaranteed to give Bulgaria part of Greek territory. More precisely, to resolve the old Greek-Bulgarian territorial dispute in favor of Bulgaria. In 1919, the Greeks, relying on the power of the Entente, resolved this dispute in their favor, seizing part of Bulgarian territory. In 1941, the Bulgarians had the opportunity to take revenge, to return the lands seized by the Greeks, relying on the power of Germany.


Hitler and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Bulgarian Tsar

With Germany


On March 1, 1941, Bulgaria signed an agreement with Germany and allowed German troops to enter its territory. In April 1941, German troops attacked Yugoslavia and Greece from Bulgarian territory. The German aggression caused enormous casualties to these countries. The Bulgarians themselves did not participate in the attack. The Bulgarians provided their country to the Germans as a springboard for aggression against their neighbors - Greece and Yugoslavia. But for Bulgaria, these were not good neighbors, but direct enemies, invaders.

Having defeated Yugoslavia and Greece, the Germans redrawn their borders. Bulgaria received large territories at the expense of these countries. However, these territories became Greek and Serbian in 1913 and 1919 – after fierce wars with the Bulgarians. This should be remembered for greater objectivity in perceiving the events of 1941.


Bulgarian troops enter Greek settlement

In the occupied Greek territory the Bulgarians established a brutal occupation regime. But this territory was captured by Greece in the wars of 1913 and 1919. During the capture the Greeks carried out an ethnic cleansing of this territory with all cruelty, and the Bulgarian population that had previously predominated there completely disappeared. This does not automatically justify the Bulgarian actions in 1941-44, but such a background of events should be taken into account.

Subsequent Bulgarian cooperation was of benefit to Germany. However, Bulgaria has no significant amounts of minerals, agriculture is unproductive, and industry is poorly developed. Bulgaria could not supply the Reich with significant amounts of ore or food, much less industrial products. The Bulgarian army occupied the Balkan regions, where the partisan movement was not yet developed. This freed up some German forces – not front-line, but security and police.

On June 22, Germany attacked the USSR. Bulgaria refused to participate in this war. Its leadership rejected German demands to send troops to the Soviet front, did not allow the Germans to gather volunteers in Bulgaria. Tsar Boris declared that he would not send troops, since sympathies for Russia were widespread in the country and a war with it was simply unthinkable for most Bulgarians. Yes, it was also against the interests of Bulgaria itself - to participate in real military actions, to lose its soldiers. Sympathies for the Russians were a pretext for the Tsar to avoid sending his soldiers to a real war.

In December 1941, Bulgaria, as a German ally, declared war on the USA and Britain. This war was called "symbolic" in Bulgaria - the country was separated from the Anglo-American forces by a large distance, which excluded real military action. This was also excluded by the fact that the Bulgarian leadership did not send its troops against the Anglo-Americans. But in 1943, the American-British air force bases came closer, and the war became not entirely symbolic. In the autumn of 1943, the Americans and British began bombing Bulgaria. More than 4 thousand civilians died.

The political regime of Bulgaria at that time is called monarcho-fascist. This means that it was not actually fascist. But it was partly so, there was suppression of rights and freedoms, dominance of official propaganda, etc. It was impossible to fight the pro-German course legally. And already in the summer of 1941, partisans and underground fighters emerged in Bulgaria. Their actions show with whom and for whom they were fighting. For example: they burned down a sawmill where timber was being prepared for shipment to Germany; they destroyed a factory that made bandages for Germany; in another raid, they burned several dozen tons of hay - fodder prepared for the German army, etc.

In socialist Bulgaria, it was stated that 30 partisans and their helpers died in the internal war against the pro-German regime. There were also many killed on the government side. In post-socialist Bulgaria, they declared that such figures of the dead were incorrect - exaggerated by an order of magnitude within the framework of communist propaganda. But perhaps the current Bulgarian government is also not entirely free of propaganda, only now anti-communist.

On our side


Thus, at the beginning of the war, Bulgaria managed to avoid participation in military actions and significantly expand its territory. But the ongoing world war had a negative impact on Bulgaria's position. From the end of 1942, Germany began to suffer losses, and the war turned. In 1943-44, the Bulgarian leadership was increasingly faced with the question of choice: to remain with Germany or break with it and go over to the anti-German side? But the Bulgarian government did not dare even to have any complications with Germany.

The situation changed only by the beginning of September 1944, when the Soviet army reached the Bulgarian border. The USSR was not going to tolerate the ongoing Bulgarian-German cooperation and declared war on Bulgaria as a German ally. On September 8, the Soviet army entered Bulgarian territory. And then it became clear on whose side the sympathies of the Bulgarian people lay. The Bulgarian troops did not engage in battles with the Soviet army, and on September 9, units of the capital's garrison rose up in rebellion, overthrowing the government.

The new government decisively sided with the anti-Hitler coalition. The Bulgarian army, subordinated to the 3rd Ukrainian Front, went to fight against Germany. According to the German side, the Bulgarians "showed enormous enthusiasm, which they did not show when they were allies of Germany."


The Medal "For the Victory over Germany", which was awarded to 120 Bulgarian soldiers

A 700-strong SS brigade was formed from the Bulgarians who remained on the German side. This unit fought several battles with the Soviet army in the last days of the war. On the side of the USSR, the Bulgarian army fought for 8 months, reaching its peak of 300 people (out of 000 in the total number of Bulgarian armed forces).

In the photographs of the Bulgarian army of that time, its weapons are striking - they are of German manufacture. Germany supplied Bulgaria with its weapon. At the same time, German industry could not fully equip its army. This means that the weapons supplied to Bulgaria were actually torn away from the German army. And then used against it.


Tank Bulgarian army

Results


Bulgaria was lucky to go through the crucible of WWII with minimal human losses – about 25 dead. In some places, circumstances worked out well for Bulgaria, in others, its leadership was cautious. At the same time, the country even received a significant territorial increase by Bulgarian standards – Southern Dobrudja remained Bulgarian.

Another result of the war was that the communists took hold in the country and immediately began terror against the representatives of the previous government; about 3 thousand people were killed. Bulgaria found itself in the Soviet zone of influence. Now there is a tendency to believe that this had only negative consequences. However, there are reasons to doubt this. Bulgaria was a relatively poor country even before the war. The example of its southern neighbors shows that it would not necessarily have become richer if the communists had not taken hold.

Greece and Turkey suppressed their communists bloodily, and the countries found themselves in the US sphere of influence. But Greece and Turkey did not become an example of democracy, economic development, and prosperity. The communists have not ruled in Bulgaria for over 30 years. So, if Bulgaria is not an example of development and general prosperity now, it is not the communists who are to blame.

Bulgaria's history in WWII was ambiguous because in 1941-44 the country cooperated with the Germans. On our, anti-Hitler, side it came out rather late. But before making accusations, let's remember that the USSR also avoided participating in the war as best it could. In WWII, everyone maneuvered in their own way, not just Bulgaria. The USSR, too, trying to avoid a clash with Germany, concluded a pact with it, cooperated economically, supplying various materials. In the situation at the end of August 1939, the USSR leadership considered this decision to be in the best interests of the country.

Bulgaria is a much smaller country than the USSR, with a much smaller military capability to counter Germany. And the USSR also took advantage of the defeat of another country by the Germans. We are talking about Poland - the USSR, by agreement with the Germans, occupied and annexed its eastern part. Moreover, Poland was also not just a hostile neighbor for the USSR, but also an invader (as a result of the war of 1920).

The purpose of the article is not to justify Bulgaria, but to show the complexity of its history (with its prehistory) in WWII, which does not fit into any unambiguous framework. There are two possible approaches to historical events - with or without taking into account the context of these events. For example, for the agreement between the USSR and Nazi Germany in August 1939, there is a tendency not to give the Soviet side a discount on the circumstances (although the circumstances were quite justifying), but to blame the USSR with heart-rending hype. It seems that this is also an incorrect approach for Bulgaria. What should be taken into account for it is the historical context, which will contribute to a more objective understanding of the events and their assessment.

Of course, one should not take this approach when meeting those in Bulgaria itself who have a negative hype about our history in WWII. There is such a thing in Bulgaria, but it still does not have such intensity and comprehensive systemic nature as in some other countries.
120 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    2 February 2025 05: 05
    Relations with Bulgaria give us anything in our time? Economic, political? Maybe we should leave her alone and let her live as she wants.
    1. +5
      2 February 2025 05: 10
      Quote: V.
      Maybe leave her alone and let her live as she wants.
      As long as Bulgaria supplies weapons to Ukraine and takes part in sanctions against our country, it cannot be left alone under any circumstances
      1. +2
        2 February 2025 05: 21
        What can we do to her? Bomb the ammunition factories, she can't do anything else. We don't want that. If she wants to be a NATO base, she should understand what will happen in case of war.
        1. +1
          2 February 2025 05: 27
          Quote: V.
          What can we do for her?
          First, take it into account, and then we'll see. wink
          1. +6
            2 February 2025 07: 45
            I suggest starting with Kirkorov!
            1. +9
              2 February 2025 09: 06
              Quote: mr.ZinGer
              I suggest starting with Kirkorov!

              so he is still Armenian, even though he is Bulgarian laughing
              1. 0
                3 February 2025 09: 22
                Or maybe not Bulgarian, but Turkish.
        2. +1
          2 February 2025 10: 12
          If only there was a desire, a little imagination...
      2. -1
        2 February 2025 13: 55
        Quote: Dutchman Michel
        Quote: V.
        Maybe leave her alone and let her live as she wants.
        As long as Bulgaria supplies weapons to Ukraine and takes part in sanctions against our country, it cannot be left alone under any circumstances

        The author seeks to justify Bulgaria's participation in Hitler's aggression against the USSR.
        What do we care about the sympathies of the Bulgarians if they supported our enemies in WWI and WWII, and now support Nazi Ukraine, supplying it with weapons that kill Russians.
        Bulgarians have a good appetite, but bad teeth. Bulgarians committed genocide against Greeks in WWII. Yes This is a crime against humanity. The Bulgarians managed to escape punishment by changing their shoes in mid-air. Now these "brothers" are helping our enemies destroy Russia. angry Somehow I don't see any public protests in Bulgaria against this. Bulgarians make money by killing Russians. So do the Serbs. The Serbs sold ammunition to those who supplied it to Ukraine. It seems that the Serbs are for us. And Vucic is not against Russia. He simply sold the ammunition without realizing what it was needed for. No. He knew everything. Vucic made money by killing Russians. It's true. Yes
        1. +3
          2 February 2025 19: 51
          This is a set of tales. Which will not live long if not repeated from time to time. Without evidence, but with pathos and according to the list.
          1. 0
            8 February 2025 22: 19
            This is a collection of tales.

            So, the fact that you robbed, killed and raped in Greece and that you dream about Thessaloniki are just fairy tales?
        2. +10
          2 February 2025 20: 54
          Quote: Bearded
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          Quote: V.
          Maybe leave her alone and let her live as she wants.
          As long as Bulgaria supplies weapons to Ukraine and takes part in sanctions against our country, it cannot be left alone under any circumstances

          The author seeks to justify Bulgaria's participation in Hitler's aggression against the USSR.
          What do we care about the sympathies of the Bulgarians if they supported our enemies in WWI and WWII, and now support Nazi Ukraine, supplying it with weapons that kill Russians.
          Bulgarians have a good appetite, but bad teeth. Bulgarians committed genocide against Greeks in WWII. Yes This is a crime against humanity. The Bulgarians managed to escape punishment by changing their shoes in mid-air. Now these "brothers" are helping our enemies destroy Russia. angry Somehow I don't see any public protests in Bulgaria against this. Bulgarians make money by killing Russians. So do the Serbs. The Serbs sold ammunition to those who supplied it to Ukraine. It seems that the Serbs are for us. And Vucic is not against Russia. He simply sold the ammunition without realizing what it was needed for. No. He knew everything. Vucic made money by killing Russians. It's true. Yes

          So, excuse me, dear bearded man, but for the FIRST TIME in a very long time an article has appeared that is generally objective and you immediately didn't like it. Firstly, you hardly read it in detail if you are talking about the genocide of the Greeks. Does the Mollov-Kafandaris agreement mean anything to you? Hardly. After all, for you ALL Bulgarians are bad because they supply weapons to Krajina. Yes, the entire Bulgarian military-industrial complex produces so much in a month that Ukraine spends in a DAY!!! Regarding the Mollov-Kafandaris agreement, it simply legitimized the destruction and expulsion of Bulgarians from White Sea Thrace. And from there they expelled somewhere around 400 people. The number of dead is unknown. The Greeks will never provide such information. And by the way, the Greeks never fulfilled their part of the agreement. They were supposed to pay for the real estate abandoned by the expelled Bulgarians and did not pay a penny. You don't see Bulgarians speaking out against the policy of helping Ukraine? Do you even have Bulgarian TV or do you think that since Bulgaria is in the EU there is freedom of speech? Hell no. There is censorship here that was unimaginable even during the times of socialism. BUT the third largest party in the country (it lost to the first two by only 000 and 2%) in its program FIRMLY STATED THAT IT WANTS ANY AID TO BE STOPPED FOR KYRGYZSTAN, and also normalization of relations with the Russian Federation, lifting of sanctions, etc., which is why waterfalls of dirt and incriminating evidence are rained down on it. (After all, in Bulgaria, Sorosites essentially rule and control TV and radio). As for changing their tune in the air. Romania is the champion here. It fought against the USSR on the eastern front, and then found itself in the camp of the winners!!! At least Bulgaria did not fight on the eastern front. And the losses inflicted on the Wehrmacht are an order of magnitude greater than the liberated troops who went not even to fight but to guard the rear of the Wehrmacht. After all, most of the units in Yugoslavia were security units!!!
          1. -2
            3 February 2025 01: 24
            How would you feel about the Russians if Bulgaria was at war with Turkey, and Russia supplied Turkey with a few weapons that killed a few Bulgarians, and the Russians scolded the government a little for that?
            Tell this to the families of the victims. It only takes one Bulgarian shell to destroy one family.
            You are right, I do not know the history of the Balkan powder keg very well. There was Ancient Greece, the empire of Alexander the Great, Great Bulgaria, Great Albania, Great Serbia, the Ottoman Empire. Many of these states existed on the same territory, and one can fight for these lands forever. But Alaska is Russian Land, and we do not start a nuclear war over it, so as not to destroy all of humanity.
            History does not tolerate the subjunctive mood: Bulgaria was on the side of Russia's enemies in the First and Second World Wars. And if the Special Military Operation in Ukraine is considered a harbinger of the Third World War, then Bulgaria is again against us. Serbia at least pretends not to know that it supplies ammunition to Ukraine through intermediaries. Bulgaria supplies weapons to the Ukrainian Nazis, whom we consider Eurofascists, quite openly. Such is the love of the Bulgarian people for the Russian people that you can't immediately understand: how is a Bulgarian different from a Turk?
            1. +4
              3 February 2025 16: 46
              Quote: Bearded
              How would you feel about the Russians if Bulgaria was at war with Turkey, and Russia supplied Turkey with a few weapons that killed a few Bulgarians, and the Russians scolded the government a little for that?
              Tell this to the families of the victims. It only takes one Bulgarian shell to destroy one family.
              You are right, I do not know the history of the Balkan powder keg very well. There was Ancient Greece, the empire of Alexander the Great, Great Bulgaria, Great Albania, Great Serbia, the Ottoman Empire. Many of these states existed on the same territory, and one can fight for these lands forever. But Alaska is Russian Land, and we do not start a nuclear war over it, so as not to destroy all of humanity.
              History does not tolerate the subjunctive mood: Bulgaria was on the side of Russia's enemies in the First and Second World Wars. And if the Special Military Operation in Ukraine is considered a harbinger of the Third World War, then Bulgaria is again against us. Serbia at least pretends not to know that it supplies ammunition to Ukraine through intermediaries. Bulgaria supplies weapons to the Ukrainian Nazis, whom we consider Eurofascists, quite openly. Such is the love of the Bulgarian people for the Russian people that you can't immediately understand: how is a Bulgarian different from a Turk?

              Yes, you are right that Bulgaria in WWI and WWII was on the side of Russia's enemies. In general, Great Serbia, Great Albania never existed. They exist only in the imagination of Albanians and Serbs. Great Bulgaria existed BUT NOT IN THE BALKANS. It existed somewhere from 635 to 750 and most of it was from the Caucasus, through the steppe territory of today's Krajina and also included modern Moldova and Romania without part of Transylvania. Somewhere in 711 it lost the eastern bank of the Dnieper but remained for another 30-40 years in control of the western bank of the Dnieper. Then, in a certain period, Bulgaria was mainly in the Balkans, but before its fall to the Turks it ALWAYS included Moldova, Wallachia and Transylvania. But you are right, these are things of the past. By the way, to think that Alaska is now Russian land, excuse me, but this is a dream of sick brains. It could have been, but the incompetent tsars sold the territory for pennies, which, by the way, never reached Russia. Now in Alaska there are not only no Russians, but also no Russian-speaking Aleuts. And on what basis do you compare the territories in the Balkans populated mainly by some ethnic group with Alaska? Regarding the supply of ammunition. And has anyone ever asked people what they want? We even held a couple of referendums, and the politicians wiped their asses with the results and said that they would not comply with them anyway!!! And this is, by the way, the so-called democracy of the EU. And whether there is respect or not is not for you to judge, but I ask you to come to Shipka on March 3 and see how many Ukrainian rags will be there (if there is even one) and how many Russian flags will be waving there. Around 100 thousand people gather there and many people carry not only Bulgarian but also Russian flags.
              1. -1
                4 February 2025 05: 35
                About Alaska: ask any Russian, and he will tell you Alaska is Russian Land. There are still Orthodox churches there. We Russians are sure that one day we will get our land back. Yes
                It is strange that throughout the history of modern independent Bulgaria, its government has not fulfilled the aspirations of the Bulgarian people, but has carried out the orders of the West. Although what is there to be surprised about? After all, you have a Western democracy. Or a dictatorship?
          2. 0
            8 February 2025 22: 21
            The Greeks will never provide such information.

            Just as the Bulgarians will not provide information about Eastern Rumelia and the fate of the Greeks who inhabited it.
            1. +1
              9 February 2025 00: 51
              Quote: Pavlos Melas
              The Greeks will never provide such information.

              Just as the Bulgarians will not provide information about Eastern Rumelia and the fate of the Greeks who inhabited it.

              And who prevented or prevents Greeks in Bulgaria from being called Greeks? Even in my wife's native village there is a so-called Greek mahalla, i.e. a quarter. Until recently, the old people in it hardly knew Bulgarian!!! So there is no point in comparing the persecution of Bulgarians in Greece with the life of Greeks in Bulgaria. No one oppressed the Greeks in Bulgaria, but in Greece, to this day, the descendants of those who remained are not allowed to speak Bulgarian. Last year, one of my friends accidentally met a descendant of the surviving Bulgarians in White Sea Thrace, and it was this descendant who told him about the deliberate assimilation of the remaining Bulgarians, and also about the oppression since WWI. hi And the fact that you are Greek does not give you the right not to know your own history. Even my great-grandfather, who was a prisoner of war in a Greek, one might say, concentration camp in WWI, told such things... my hair still stands on end when I remember. hi
              1. +1
                9 February 2025 08: 52
                And who prevented or prevents the Greeks in Bulgaria from being called Greeks?

                Ehe ehhe Greeks left Bulgaria during the population exchange of the descendants of the Philippian Greeks, I also met, that the Bulgarians were "white and fluffy" I also heard. Who among us mainly fought in the civil war and for what purposes? These are mainly Bulgarians who were not sent to their countries, first friends of the Bulgarian fascists, then friends of Tito's communists. Why do you Θεσσαλονίκη this city is not yours.
                The fact that you are Bulgaria does not give you the right to forget the crimes of the Bulgarians on Greek soil, our north suffered greatly from your crimes, you tried to Bulgarianize the Greek population in the best traditions of the Turks. I also met victims of Bulgarian crimes. You are lucky that Philippopolis remained Plovdiv.
                1. +1
                  9 February 2025 09: 26
                  But did I ever deny the crimes of the Bulgarian fascists? But you deny the existence of crimes on the part of the Greeks, although there were many. So you have IMHO and I don't need to answer you anymore. Especially since you don't want to hear it. hi P.S. By the way, after the end of WWII, the Greek government wanted the border along the northern slopes of the Rhodopes and Plovdiv was not listed there. It remained further north. Although the Rhodopes were never inhabited by Greeks. I mean the last 1200 years.
                  1. +1
                    9 February 2025 13: 01
                    But did I ever deny the crimes of the Bulgarian fascists?

                    Of course they didn’t deny it, because it’s difficult to deny, but you left out the crimes of the Bulgarian committees, how many Greeks were killed because they didn’t want to join the exarchate.
              2. +1
                9 February 2025 12: 58
                So there is no point in comparing the persecution of Bulgarians in Greece with the life of Greeks in Bulgaria. No one oppressed the Greeks in Bulgaria, but in Greece, to this day, the descendants of those who remained are not allowed to speak Bulgarian.

                Sorry, but this is not true either. In the Kastoria region there are villages that speak Bulgarian and it is not our fault that a sufficient number of these people, supporting Tito’s ideas, fled to socialist countries after the defeat.
      3. +1
        3 February 2025 20: 28
        Yes, "bros"...
        "The Bulgarians gave their country to the Germans as a springboard for aggression against their neighbors - Greece and Yugoslavia. But for Bulgaria these were not good neighbors, but direct enemies, invaders." - Where do such "facts" come from?
        Bulgarian troops participated together with Hitler's Wehrmacht in the occupation of Yugoslavia.
        "The political regime of Bulgaria at that time is called monarcho-fascist. This means that he wasn't really fascist. But partly it was, there was a suppression of rights and freedoms, and the dominance of official propaganda..."
        It's just funny! It's like being "a little bit pregnant".
        1. -1
          4 February 2025 05: 16
          Quote: Victor_Frolov
          This means that he was not actually fascist. But he was partly fascist.
          There is a definition of fascism, adopted by the UN, although it is very vague. Bulgaria was not a fascist state. An ordinary totalitarian regime
    2. +3
      2 February 2025 05: 22
      And what about the Alyosha monument in Bulgaria now?
      1. +3
        2 February 2025 05: 28
        And in other countries where monuments to our soldiers are being torn down, what can we do? And here too, let's make a statement and honor the memory of those who died at home. They will remain in our history.
        1. 0
          2 February 2025 11: 27
          Quote: V.
          And in other countries where monuments to our soldiers are being torn down, what can we do?

          And in Dukhovshchina, Smolensk region, there are still monuments standing at the German military cemetery and they are not being torn down.
        2. 0
          2 February 2025 22: 04
          Maybe we should offer these tribaltics, Poles, Czechs to take our graves. And rebury them in the Motherland with honors. But then, let every Anglo-Saxon cur know that there is nothing sacred left for us on their land. And the purest thing is ashes.
      2. +1
        2 February 2025 11: 22
        They haven't torn it down yet, but they're constantly painting it in different colors.
      3. -16
        2 February 2025 12: 00
        And what about the Alyosha monument in Bulgaria now?

        Unfortunately, it still hangs over Plovdiv.
        1. +2
          2 February 2025 12: 50
          It's not clear, do you want to remove it? Why?
        2. +2
          2 February 2025 19: 59
          Fortunately, Russia's victory is near and the fascists in Bulgaria will get their just due
        3. +6
          2 February 2025 20: 56
          Quote: stoqn477
          And what about the Alyosha monument in Bulgaria now?

          Unfortunately, it still hangs over Plovdiv.

          Excuse me, Stoyane, but are you by any chance a member of Soros's NGO?
      4. +8
        2 February 2025 17: 53
        The monument to Alyosha was intact and unharmed - I lived under it.
      5. +10
        2 February 2025 19: 55
        It stands. Untouched. Along with 454 other monuments to the Russian and Soviet wars of 1877-8 and 1944-5. All over the country. On holidays and anniversaries - in flowers. The names of streets, churches, squares are also standing. The fascists and liberals are raging, but increasingly quietly.
        1. +3
          2 February 2025 21: 56
          I was friends with a Bulgarian. He was a good friend. drinks
      6. +7
        2 February 2025 20: 32
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        And what about the Alyosha monument in Bulgaria now?

        Don't worry Vladimir, Alyosha is standing there. What will happen to him? wink
        1. 0
          3 February 2025 01: 44
          Quote: nedgen
          What will happen to him?

          I know it's worth it...It's just that all the fuss around it is not good.
      7. +1
        8 February 2025 22: 26
        And what about the Alyosha monument in Bulgaria now?

        Of course, I don’t like neighbors who dream about our north, but here you are wrong, it is in normal condition and even flowers are brought to it.
  2. +4
    2 February 2025 05: 08
    But as a result of the defeat, Germany did not lose its own German regions.
    What do these actually mean "non-German regions"? What about the part of northwestern Germany that became part of Belgium as a result of WWI? What about the German lands that became Poland? What about Northern Schleswig that went to Denmark. There is also Lorraine and Alsace, but that's a little different.
    1. Fat
      +6
      2 February 2025 11: 12
      Greetings, Mikhil. There are some inaccuracies in the article, but it is not critical.
      There is not a word about the ROK (Russian Security Corps) about 17 thousand people of the White Guards and traitors who fought against the Yugoslav partisans. Perhaps this is the notorious "political correctness", perhaps it simply has no direct relation to the topic. what
      1. +3
        2 February 2025 11: 16
        Quote: Thick
        who fought against the Yugoslav partisans
        Good health! Well, and the Yugoslav partisans themselves fought against each other. All against all! wink
        1. Fat
          +7
          2 February 2025 11: 59
          It is quite natural that the Chetniks opposed Tito. They had very different ideas about the structure of the country.
          The PLA fought against the Kuomintang, although both fought against the Japanese
          1. man
            +2
            2 February 2025 19: 59
            Quote: Thick
            It is quite natural that the Chetniks opposed Tito. They had very different ideas about the structure of the country.
            The PLA fought against the Kuomintang, although both fought against the Japanese

            Moreover, according to our intelligence officer Pyotr Vlasov, the Kuomintang fought the Japanese much more fiercely and effectively than Mao.
    2. +2
      2 February 2025 14: 49
      Even Hitler did not take Northern Schleswig from Denmark. The lands that became part of Poland were mostly ethnic Polish.
      1. -1
        2 February 2025 17: 09
        Quote: Sergej1972
        Even Hitler did not take Northern Schleswig from Denmark
        It was a political question. Hitler united all German peoples under one roof and it was not convenient for him to take away the lands of a brotherly people, as the Nazis believed.
    3. +6
      2 February 2025 16: 24
      Yes, these are not German lands per se. These are lands that Germany had previously seized from its neighbors.
      1. +4
        2 February 2025 17: 10
        Quote: Yaroslav Kidinov
        Yes, these are not German lands per se. These are lands that Germany had previously seized from its neighbors.
        All lands were once captured by someone wink
  3. +9
    2 February 2025 05: 11
    A good illustration of how small and weak countries are forced to lean on strong and rich powers to ensure their survival.
    Today you are rich and influential - and now Bulgaria (or Romania or another Balkan country) is your faithful ally.
    Tomorrow you will be weakened, you will lose your position - and your satellite will defect to the side of a new strong player - the EEC, Germany, the USA, NATO.
    That is, the friendship of such countries must always be bought, without any hope for sincerity of feelings.
    1. 0
      2 February 2025 05: 35
      Quote: U-58
      Small and weak countries are forced to lean on strong and rich powers to ensure their survival.

      Type: Remora fish
      1. +3
        2 February 2025 07: 54
        That's exactly it. The weak lean on the strong.
    2. +2
      2 February 2025 06: 52
      Quote: U-58
      Today you are rich and influential - and now Bulgaria (or Romania or another Balkan country) is your faithful ally.

      The state must be strong to protect its independence. Under Yeltsin, ISIS encroached on the North Caucasus, Estonia on Pytalovo, Finland on Karelia, the USA on Wrangel Island, Japan on the Kuril Islands. And after the start of the North Caucasus War, Trump has paid more attention to the annexation of Greenland, the Panama Canal, Mexico and Canada.
      1. +3
        2 February 2025 07: 11
        Estonia encroached on Pechory, and Latvia wanted to snatch Pytalovo.
        1. 0
          2 February 2025 07: 24
          Quote: Waterways 672
          and in Pytalovo - Latvia already wanted to snatch it
          And I would have chopped it off if Drunkard was still sitting in the Kremlin. Pah, pah wink
          1. +2
            2 February 2025 18: 44
            Quote: Dutchman Michel
            And it would have been chopped off if Drunkard were still sitting in the Kremlin.

            Yeltsin was not a deliberate and conscious traitor to Russia's interests. He simply allowed into his circle a mass of people who had dreamed of the collapse of the country since their school years and were ready to cooperate with Islamic extremists (Chubais, Gaidar, Berezovsky) for this purpose. During the 1st Chechen war, Yeltsin had the honesty and intelligence to admit his inability to lead the country. But in fact, it was Yeltsin who stopped the collapse of the country by ceding power to Putin. Fortunately, Putin is cleansing the country's leadership of betrayal and treason without excesses and has not allowed the country to slide into civil and interethnic war.
      2. +2
        2 February 2025 18: 56
        Strong? With Bulgarian resources? Well, well... They might be enough for Romania "one on one" but that's not a fact :(
        1. +2
          2 February 2025 19: 04
          Quote: Not the fighter
          Strong? With Bulgarian resources? Well, well... They might be enough for Romania "one on one" but that's not a fact :(

          Bulgaria gained independence and territorial expansion at the expense of Turkey thanks to Russia's support. When Bulgaria attacked Serbia in the Second Balkan War, it destroyed the fragile Slavic unity. As a result, it itself suffered defeat and in 1914, Austria, seeing that only Russia would side with Serbia, decided to start a war against Russia and Serbia.
          1. +1
            2 February 2025 23: 04
            The military situation between Georgia and Sarbia will meet with Bulgaria and is excluded before the inter-alliance war.
            1. +3
              3 February 2025 00: 05
              Quote: Danail
              The military situation between Georgia and Sarbia will meet with Bulgaria and is excluded before the inter-alliance war.

              By the way, Yandex translator translated from Bulgarian as follows: "The agreement between Bulgaria and Greece was concluded before the start of the inter-allied war." But knowing Russian, it seems to me that you wrote "The military agreement between Greece and Serbia against Bulgaria was concluded before the 2nd Balkan War." I do not know the intricacies of Balkan diplomacy at the beginning of the 20th century. But Bulgaria made a very big mistake by starting the 2nd Balkan War. All this became known only after its end. At that time, the king of Bulgaria was an ethnic German. And the Germans are chronically good at getting involved in hopeless and disastrous wars. Although the German generals are considered the best by the Pashtuns, the German generals independently won the wars they started only in coalition wars with the British or Russians in alliance. Your current elite can lead Bulgaria to the loss of independence. When I was studying at Stankin, we were already told that Russia’s main enemy is not the USA, but Turkey, which has plans to revive its empire and, by all indications, will quickly make great progress on this path.
              1. +1
                3 February 2025 20: 14
                Right ste. No country can fight successfully on its own without an ally. And the situation is ally with Bulgaria and is evil at the moment. Both for the West and for the Iztok, the material itself is dispersed for the purposes of rubbish. In the near future, thanksgiving for Trump and the negative commandment for the contribution to NATO from 5 percent of the BVP from Tozi Union will remain the same vain entanglement without restraint, and in Turkey they will remember one and the other for Iztochna Rumelia and for Bulgaria, interesting times will come.
                1. 0
                  3 February 2025 21: 27
                  Quote: Danail
                  for contribution to NATO from 5 percent of the BVP

                  The problem for NATO countries is not that they will spend 5% on defense, but that these 5% will be squandered by Christian NATO countries on the war with Russia. Turkey will spend these 5% on expanding its influence in Albania, Bosnia, Macedonia, North Africa, Mongolia, Central Asia and the Middle East. By spending on defense, NATO countries are pushing themselves out of Russia, and Türkiye is capturing new markets.
                  1. +1
                    3 February 2025 23: 17
                    No economics can separate 5 percent in peacetime for the invasion, it’s just false. The last two or more severe economic crises or the collapse of NATO became a united military-political bloc.
                    1. +1
                      4 February 2025 01: 15
                      Quote: Danail
                      No economics can separate 5 percent in peacetime for invasion

                      Israel's share of military spending in 2023 was above 5%. Nothing terrible happened to the Israeli economy. Now in Russia the share of military spending is higher than under Yeltsin. The economy in Russia is now much more stable than under Yeltsin.
                      1. +1
                        4 February 2025 07: 20
                        Israel is in eternal war with someone se setish from sit down. I appreciate this from the special attitude towards SASch and from the large number of subsidies. There is no analogy with the European state today. Maybe even Poland.
                      2. +1
                        4 February 2025 08: 28
                        It seems to me that the USSR and Russia have always spent a share of their resources on defense that is measured in 2-digit percentages. When the share of military spending was higher, the USSR and Russia developed faster than under Yeltsin. The years of Putin's rule are no exception. Russia's nuclear potential is not lower than that of the United States, and in reality it costs the Russians no less than the Americans.
    3. -1
      2 February 2025 10: 13
      Or you can use a broom if you don’t feel like using a whip.
  4. +10
    2 February 2025 07: 08
    Bulgarians are an ethnic group very close to Russians. And Bulgarians know and remember this. But society in Bulgaria, as everywhere else, is not homogeneous.
    It is worth recalling how it all began. In the First Balkan War, the Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks, with their combined efforts, defeated the Turks and achieved complete liberation from the Turkish yoke. They took Adrianople and all European territory up to Constantinople from the Turks. In addition, Bulgaria received access to the Aegean Sea and other vast territories. But then disaster struck.
    Northern Macedonia, populated by Bulgarians, was liberated from the Turks by the Serbs. And according to the agreement with Bulgaria, they were supposed to return it after the victory. But they did not return it. Instead, they began intensive Serbianization of the population. Nicholas II was the guarantor of this agreement and the arbitrator. The Bulgarians demanded for a long time that the parties comply with the agreement, but they never achieved anything.
    And in 1913, the Bulgarians attacked Serbia. The Second Balkan War began. The Greeks, looking at this, also decided to participate and take back the lands they considered theirs. Turkey also decided to return the lost Adrianople (Edirne). Bulgaria found itself in a war on 3 fronts. Russia decided not to interfere in all this. Although again it was the guarantor of the agreement between the Bulgarians and the Serbs.
    But the worst thing for Bulgaria came when Romania entered the war with the aim of taking away Southern Dobrudja. The Bulgarians simply had no troops left and the Romanians, having encountered almost no resistance, were already approaching Sofia. And then the Bulgarians capitulated. All the warring parties could not stand the Romanians and they were quickly put in their place.
    So if we look at the politics of Bulgaria as a nation close to us, we must look through the prism of that catastrophe of the Bulgarians in which Russia’s role was not the most successful.
    1. -1
      2 February 2025 13: 59
      Quote: malyvalv
      Bulgarians are an ethnic group very close to Russians. And Bulgarians know and remember this. But society in Bulgaria, as everywhere else, is not homogeneous.
      It is worth recalling how it all began. In the First Balkan War, the Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks, with their combined efforts, defeated the Turks and achieved complete liberation from the Turkish yoke. They took Adrianople and all European territory up to Constantinople from the Turks. In addition, Bulgaria received access to the Aegean Sea and other vast territories. But then disaster struck.
      Northern Macedonia, populated by Bulgarians, was liberated from the Turks by the Serbs. And according to the agreement with Bulgaria, they were supposed to return it after the victory. But they did not return it. Instead, they began intensive Serbianization of the population. Nicholas II was the guarantor of this agreement and the arbitrator. The Bulgarians demanded for a long time that the parties comply with the agreement, but they never achieved anything.
      And in 1913, the Bulgarians attacked Serbia. The Second Balkan War began. The Greeks, looking at this, also decided to participate and take back the lands they considered theirs. Turkey also decided to return the lost Adrianople (Edirne). Bulgaria found itself in a war on 3 fronts. Russia decided not to interfere in all this. Although again it was the guarantor of the agreement between the Bulgarians and the Serbs.
      But the worst thing for Bulgaria came when Romania entered the war with the aim of taking away Southern Dobrudja. The Bulgarians simply had no troops left and the Romanians, having encountered almost no resistance, were already approaching Sofia. And then the Bulgarians capitulated. All the warring parties could not stand the Romanians and they were quickly put in their place.
      So if we look at the politics of Bulgaria as a nation close to us, we must look through the prism of that catastrophe of the Bulgarians in which Russia’s role was not the most successful.

      Bulgarians may be an ethnic group close to Russians, or they may not be, but the Bulgarian government is always anti-Russian unless there are our military bases on Bulgarian territory.
      1. +3
        2 February 2025 17: 29
        Things were different between us and the Bulgarians. There was also a time when Bulgaria was considered the 16th republic of the USSR. Without any bases. We need to look more at the people and not at the governments. We also had very different governments in the 20th century.
        Well, the Americans have a lot of different bases. But can they name at least one nation that is close to them?
        1. 0
          4 February 2025 02: 15
          Quote: malyvalv
          Can they name at least one nation that is close to them?

          That's not what the Americans are talking about; the main thing for them is money, not people.
      2. +5
        2 February 2025 19: 37
        Quote: Bearded
        but the Bulgarian government is always anti-Russian

        This is a consequence of the policy traditional for Russia during the times of the empire (as well as for the modern Russian Federation) of providing assistance to the peoples and complete disregard for work with the elites, preferring to work with what our enemies will grow. (The USSR had its own quirks, they understood the value of working with the elites, but after 1953 they did not understand how to do this, however, as they stopped understanding how to do everything else)
        1. At the end of the liberation war, Alexander II nominated his wife's nephew (a German) to the Bulgarian throne - Alexander of Battenberg (Hesse-Darmstadt), a "Russian" general, who was granted the right to remain in the Lutheran faith and not to accept Orthodoxy! The new tsar was quick to begin to lead the matter to a break with Russia, using the advice of Great Britain and inciting Bulgarian nationalism. Despite Russia's objections, he started a war with his neighbors, later blaming all the failures on them and was eventually overthrown. (Does this remind you of anyone? Modern Ukraine and Armenia rolled into one)
        2. And here is the founder of the last dynasty of "Bulgarian" tsars: Ferdinand Maximilian Karl Leopold Maria of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha! An Austrian Catholic, who, unlike the "Russian" general, had enough sense to make his son, if not himself, an Orthodox Catholic. He came to power promising to restore relations with Russia, which had been destroyed by Battenberg, and after strengthening his power, what? That's right, he became an ally of Germany.
        (Those who are surprised by the arrival of Nazi presidents of the independent state in Russian voices should understand that in international relations it is more useful to study history, not jurisprudence.)
    2. +6
      2 February 2025 21: 35
      In general, Valery, you correctly reflected the situation, but forgot or did not know several very important points. Firstly, Ferdinand was at the head of Bulgaria. And he was still a grandmaniac. Secondly, the alliance (secret) between the Greeks and Serbs against Bulgaria was concluded several months before the inter-allied war. Thirdly, Nicholas II was not such a ladybug. He did not become an arbitrator, but firmly took the side of the Serbs. In addition, it was on the orders of Nicholas's government that Romania attacked Bulgaria and even Nicholas promised to become the patron of the regiment that would be the first to cross the Bulgarian border. And Ferdinand himself was still an idiot then. For example, if he was going to fight the Serbs, why the hell was it necessary to give the order to ONLY two divisions to attack the Serbs, and not the entire first army. (And why the hell was it necessary to start the war of 2 without preparation, first of all, in the political sense?) In this entire war of 1913, there was only one bright ray for Bulgaria. The troops under the command of General Vladimir Vazov completely defeated the Greek troops in the Kresna Gorge and the way to Thessaloniki (or Solun, as you like) was open, but this could not change the overall picture. The Romanians were advancing from the north and approaching Sofia...
    3. -1
      3 February 2025 01: 55
      Quote: malyvalv
      Bulgarians are an ethnic group very close to Russians. And Bulgarians know and remember this.
      The first ruler First Bulgarian Kingdom - Khan Asparukh 681-701, Bulgarians Turkic people, which conquered Slavic "Union of Seven Clans".

      Quote: malyvalv

      It's worth remembering how it all began.
      It all started with the Russian Empire won the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78...
      Without Russia there would be no Bulgarians in general and no Bulgaria in particular.
      1. +3
        3 February 2025 12: 35
        To what extent Russians themselves are Turks is still a question. It is not for nothing that "scratch a Russian and you will find a Tatar".
        To what extent the Turkic Bulgarians who migrated from the banks of the Volga changed the ethnic background of the Slavs in the Balkans is also a question. Also a question to what extent Russians are part of the Varangians, Vikings, Normans. Well, it was they who initially created our state. Well, and the question to what extent Russians are descendants of the migration of the Huns that swept through our lands, from whom we inherited the Finno-Ugric peoples who still live and thrive alongside the Tatars and Bashkirs.
        You have to look at it more simply. Bulgarians are Bulgarians. And they would be with us and without us.
  5. +9
    2 February 2025 08: 00
    Little Entente
    alliance of Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia, created in 1921, what claims did Czechoslovakia have against Bulgaria? The goal was to contain Hungarian irredentism (Hungary laid claim to Yugoslav Vojvodina, part of the Slovak lands, Romanian Transylvania), as well as to prevent the recreation of the Habsburg monarchy in Austria or Hungary. The author confuses it with the Balkan Entente - a military-political alliance of Greece, Romania, Turkey and Yugoslavia, concluded in Athens on February 9, 1934 with the aim of maintaining the post-Versailles balance of power in the Balkans. Yes, this alliance was aimed at providing mutual assistance in the event of an attack on a member of the union by any Balkan state that was not part of the union (that is, Bulgaria or Albania), but the members of the union admitted the possibility of Bulgaria and Albania joining the Balkan Entente, however, these states, which were at that time in the spheres of influence of Germany and Italy accordingly, they refused to join the union. And finally, both Ententes were actively supported by France, France had its own reasons
    The article is written in a liberal spirit, something is deliberately hushed up, something is distorted, also deliberately.
    1. +2
      2 February 2025 16: 32
      Romania and Yugoslavia had acute territorial contradictions with Brogania at that time. So, any union of these countries was also directed against Bulgaria.
      Bulgaria refused to join the Balkan Entente not because it was in Germany's sphere of influence, but because it considered the countries in this alliance to be invaders and did not want to recognize and legalize their conquests through an alliance with them.
      1. +1
        2 February 2025 16: 43
        Author, first decide which Entente you are writing about, the Little or the Balkan, and then we will talk. Because these are two very different things.
  6. 0
    2 February 2025 09: 16
    I see that compared to the Bulgarians, the Jews are having a rest.
  7. +3
    2 February 2025 09: 28
    In my opinion, it is a completely unfair policy that loyalty through self-deception that these are brothers - Slavs, and this means that we are a brotherly people, must be bought with the blood of a Russian soldier, and then see how these "brothers" Slavs, together with the barbarians of the West, stab Russia in the back, and Russia again saves them at the cost of the blood of its soldiers - this is not the right policy. After Russia, at the cost of the lives of its soldiers, saved the Bulgarians from their destruction by the Turks in the 19th century, the Bulgarians had to fall again in the Second World War in the 20th century. The question is, what did the Bulgarians do between these rescues by Russia? And they fought on the side of Russia's enemies in both the First World War and the Second World War. Then the USSR fed them and rebuilt them for thirty years and shamefully kept silent about the betrayal of the Bulgarians both in WWI and WWII, so in "gratitude" for this Bulgaria is now a member of NATO! What brothers...
    1. +3
      2 February 2025 16: 54
      the Bulgarians had to fall again during the Second World War in the 20th century
      It was how they saved - and from whom.. On September 8, 1944, the Red Army entered the territory of Bulgaria, and on September 9, 1944, the government of the Fatherland Front came to power and the military actions of the Soviet troops against Bulgaria were stopped. Soviet troops passed through Bulgarian territory, without violating the activities of local authorities and without disarming the Bulgarian army, the population greeted the Red Army enthusiastically.
  8. +1
    2 February 2025 09: 38
    Moreover, Bulgaria was a party to this conflict. the loser. In 1913
    First of all, she became the ATTACKING side that unleashed the 2nd Balkan war... For which she got what she deserved.

    And she was an ally of the aggressor in both World Wars and got off very lightly for it.

    .
    We are talking about Poland - the eastern part of which the USSR, by agreement with the Germans, occupied and annexed.


    Its eastern part of the USSR was saved from the Nazis. The author would have preferred the opposite?
    1. -1
      2 February 2025 11: 32
      Quote: Olgovich
      First of all, it became the ATTACKING side that unleashed the 2nd Baltic war.
      There were all predators, looking at who to tear off a piece from. Bulgaria only initiated the process :wink
      Quote: Olgovich
      Its eastern part of the USSR was saved from the Nazis
      And then he added Silesia and part of Prussia.
      1. +1
        2 February 2025 12: 06
        Quote: Dutchman Michel
        Bulgaria merely initiated the process.

        and Germany also only initiated
        Quote: Dutchman Michel
        And then he added Silesia and part of Prussia.

        much larger: Eastern Pomerania and Eastern Brandenburg, the former Free City of Danzig, as well as the Szczecin district. But the losses in the East are greater.
        1. -1
          2 February 2025 14: 54
          In terms of the area of ​​lost lands in the East, yes. But in terms of economic development, infrastructure, the territories in the West were more valuable for Poland, it was the most developed region of the Polish People's Republic.
    2. -1
      2 February 2025 16: 37
      And you are a master of polemics. But attributing to someone something that was absolutely not in his words is a dirty trick.
      1. 0
        3 February 2025 13: 24
        Quote: Yaroslav Kidinov
        And you are a master of polemics. But attributing to someone something that was absolutely not in his words is a dirty trick.

        And the eastern part of Poland became the USSR not by agreement with the Germans, but based on the results of WWII-See History
  9. -1
    2 February 2025 10: 09
    And I, still a pioneer, burned a haystack. And beyond the western border, no matter how you look at it, there is a fascist camp.
  10. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. -1
        2 February 2025 14: 08
        Quote: parusnik
        o-o-o looks like a rehabilitation of fascism...
        It's not for nothing that they erected a monument to Ilyin in Moscow.

        And where is this "creation"? Send me the address. I want to piss on it. Yes
        1. +3
          2 February 2025 15: 23
          The monument to the Russian philosopher I. A. Ilyin, including the Memorial to the White Warriors, is located on the territory of the Donskoy Monastery in Moscow. Address: Donskaya Square, Building 1. Be careful, otherwise you might splash on the memorial. You'll repent later. It's all there together, to the White Warriors and their ideologist. And the monument to Ivan Ilyin in Yekaterinburg is located at the address: Sheinkmana Street, 57. You can still go there.
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    3. 0
      2 February 2025 16: 52
      The comment is a good example of hype. It is built on distortion. -
      The Bulgarian regime is called moarcho-fascist to show its difference from the classical fascism of Germany or Italy.
      If Testov writes that the Bulgarian regime "was not the least bit fascist", and calls Niš and Smederevo Bulgarian lands, then he is striving to rehabilitate fascism.
      But the article says something else
  11. -1
    2 February 2025 12: 18
    Quote: North 2
    In my opinion, it is a completely unfair policy that loyalty through self-deception that these are brothers - Slavs, and this means that we are a brotherly people, must be bought with the blood of a Russian soldier, and then see how these "brothers" Slavs, together with the barbarians of the West, stab Russia in the back, and Russia again saves them at the cost of the blood of its soldiers - this is not the right policy. After Russia, at the cost of the lives of its soldiers, saved the Bulgarians from their destruction by the Turks in the 19th century, the Bulgarians had to fall again in the Second World War in the 20th century. The question is, what did the Bulgarians do between these rescues by Russia? And they fought on the side of Russia's enemies in both the First World War and the Second World War. Then the USSR fed them and rebuilt them for thirty years and shamefully kept silent about the betrayal of the Bulgarians both in WWI and WWII, so in "gratitude" for this Bulgaria is now a member of NATO! What brothers...

    Firstly, in the 19th century, no one threatened us with total destruction. Will the Sultan cut off the branch he sits on and that feeds him? This is not the first time we have rebelled. Yes, he carried out a serious punitive operation against those who rebelled. He wiped settlements off the face of the earth. How did your tsar and emperors, and after them the USSR, act with those who raised their heads? Exactly the same. You go through them with fire and sword. By the way, you are not fighting only "for us". Or have you forgotten that you are fighting the Ottomans in the Caucasus? There are no Bulgarians there, but then you are taking lands from the Ottoman Empire in this region. For you, this is another Russian-Ottoman war. You must repay them for the Crimean War, and now you have been allowed to do so. No one has stopped you.
    Secondly. You are not saving us from World War II. There is no one to save us from. We are not occupied and crushed. We have a functioning state with all its systems. Even if it is small and weak. Our only problems are with the partisans who rise up on your orders, mind you. There were no partisans before June 22, 1941. Do you see the connection?
    And as for what you feed us. With what? Or don't you remember that before that day you ate Bulgarian tomatoes, so to speak? Wheat? Our Dobrudja feeds us plenty. Were there no livestock farms? There were. You sold only oil and various materials that we cannot produce. You sold. You did not give it to us. As we did not give it to you. But at reduced prices, so as not to anger you. That is how it was done in SIV.
    1. +3
      2 February 2025 16: 40
      Our only problems are with the partisans who rise up on your orders, mind you. There were no partisans before June 22, 1941. Do you see the connection?
      There really is a connection. The last Republican partisan unit in Franco's Spain was destroyed in 1940, the partisan movement in France began to form in 1942, in Belgium at the end of 1941. In German-occupied Poland at the end of 1939, in Greece, Albania, Yugoslavia in 1941, in Slovakia at the end of 1942, in Hungary in 1943, in Italy in 1942, in Romania, partisans existed, mainly in occupied Moldova, this is all the work of the Comintern. And I'm not joking, I'm completely serious. The units were formed by those who went through the school of fighting fascism in Spain. What I like about nationalists of any nationality is that you will never become united and will constantly gnaw each other's throats.
      Yes, he carried out a serious punitive operation against those who rebelled. He wiped the settlements off the face of the earth. How did your tsar and emperors, and after them the USSR, act with those who raised their heads? Exactly the same.

      The Russian public was bad, which insisted on war with Turkey, the Russian emperor, for the sake of appearances, was outraged by the massacre of the rebel Bulgarians, but he was not going to liberate the Bulgarians and take revenge for the Crimean War, not at all. You should have painted the monuments to Alexander pink, like the monument to Alyosha, to be fair. And who in the USSR raised their heads, whose settlements, which republics were wiped off the face of the earth? They were hanged, shot, en masse. I liked your lecho and ketchup. But I didn't eat tomatoes. In our area they grew so much of them, we barely had time to process them. And all sorts of sauces, ketchups were rarely bought, homemade preserves were enough.
    2. -1
      3 February 2025 02: 06
      Quote: stoqn477

      Firstly, in the 19th century no one threatened us with total destruction. Will the Sultan cut off the branch on which he sits and which feeds him? This is not the first time we have rebelled. Yes, he carried out a serious punitive operation against those who rebelled. He wiped the settlements off the face of the earth.
      So why are you embarrassed - after the overthrow of the "Soviet yoke" return to the "Native Harbor" of Turkey, from which you Bulgarians were so uncivilizedly torn away by the Russian Empire...
    3. +1
      4 February 2025 20: 15
      Quote: stoqn477
      Or have you forgotten that you are fighting the Ottomans in the Caucasus? There are no Bulgarians there, but then you are taking lands from the Ottoman Empire in that region.
      If we are to be honest, let us admit that our military actions in the Caucasus and Transcaucasia against the Ottoman Empire were always within the framework of those wars with the Ottoman Empire that we waged first in our Black Sea region, and then in the Balkans. It was, so to speak, our permanent, but always secondary Asian theater of military operations of our European wars with the Ottoman Empire, diverting the forces of the Ottoman Empire from the main front.
      Our only problems are with the partisans who rise up on your orders, mind you. There were no partisans before June 22, 1941. Do you see the connection?
      Are you sure? What about the famous Bulgarian anarchist Hristo Dimitrov Nestorov? He created his own partisan unit and led it in Tyzha back in 1940. After the war, he emigrated to France and then returned to Bulgaria, where he became the commander of the Goryan anti-communist combat group in 1953-1954. He was liquidated by the state security organs of the PRB on March 23, 1954.
      You sold only oil and various materials that we cannot produce. You sold. You did not give it to us. As we did not give it to you. But at reduced prices, so as not to anger you.
      Why did you need oil if there were no oil refineries in Bulgaria until the mid-1960s? Until the mid-1960s, we sold you not oil, but oil products: gasoline, kerosene, diesel fuel, and even heating oil. Yes, you received a little more from socialist Albania. And only with the commissioning (again with our great assistance) of the petrochemical plant in Burgas, the first stage of which was commissioned in the second half of 1963, did the USSR begin to supply Bulgaria with crude oil. Since the construction of the plant was simultaneously underway south of Burgas, a special port called "Druzhba" was being built to receive oil from the USSR, from here oil was delivered to the plant via a 27 km long pipeline. And more. Excuse me, if you claim that you supplied us with bell peppers at reduced prices so as not to anger us, then it turns out that we first supplied you with petroleum products, and then with oil at reduced prices so as not to anger you? what
      By the way, did we also build the nuclear power plant in Bulgaria for you so as not to anger you? The Kozloduy NPP is located on the banks of the Danube River, 200 km north of the country's capital Sofia and 5 km from the city of Kozloduy, after which it was named. Construction of the NPP began in April 1970, and in 1974 the station began generating electricity for consumers.
      Are you really that potentially evil? what
  12. +5
    2 February 2025 12: 29
    In the mid-80s, Bulgaria reached the standard of living of the USSR. The average salary was 200 leva /200 rubles/, the provision of food and goods was even higher. In neighboring Romania, salaries were one and a half times lower, goods and products were in short supply, even worse than in the USSR. The Black Sea resorts received not only their own and Soviet tourists, but also guests from Western countries. Canned vegetables and fruits, juices and wines were on sale throughout the USSR, the foreign trade balance was active. After the collapse of the USSR, Bulgaria became impoverished, there was a wild depopulation from 9 million in 1991 to 6,5 million now. In the last 10 years, the economy has developed well, there are good grants from the EU, the average salary of 900 euros is comparable to Russian, but prices, with the exception of food, are very high. For example, gasoline costs 140 rubles per liter at the exchange rate, utilities bite. Vacations in Bulgaria used to be affordable, in recent years everything has become decently expensive. Overall, the collapse of the socialist bloc in Bulgaria did not give anything special, the country remains quite poor, has lost almost a third of its population in 30 years, well, except that Bulgarians now travel around the world without visas. Those who can afford it.
    1. +1
      3 February 2025 12: 52
      It's not just about salaries.
      My parents (who lived in the North! with the corresponding supplies and salaries) went to Bulgaria in Soviet times and came back with their eyes wide open, having seen "another life". My mother with a luxurious fur coat and a bunch of books, my stepfather with a suitcase of spare parts for Zhiguli. The summary was "Bulgaria has everything!"
  13. BAI
    +2
    2 February 2025 12: 41
    My father ended the war in Bulgaria.
  14. -1
    2 February 2025 14: 53
    Strictly speaking, both Bulgarians and Romanians are still “allies”, history shows that it is necessary to pour in a minimum of anything there.
  15. +7
    2 February 2025 18: 48
    The fact that the Bulgarians tried to solve their problems on the quiet is understandable and even, perhaps, to some extent correct.
    As for helping the Germans. Well, where would they go? The first revolt from Tsar Boris and he, along with the entire country, would be put in the position of a drinking deer, forced to do the same thing, only in a larger volume and in a more uncomfortable position.
    Even if we tried, we certainly wouldn’t be able to help them (we would have to save ourselves), and the alliance between the USSR and the monarchy is such a thing...
    As for monuments. Dear comrades, are our situation much better? Every now and then, all sorts of idiots are caught at the Eternal Flame. They are punished quite severely, but, characteristically, they are not transferred. And it would be good if they were migrants, but no. Our own schoolchildren after patriotic education lessons
    1. +2
      2 February 2025 19: 52
      Our schoolchildren should be spanked during patriotic education classes. Love for the Motherland comes only through pain.
  16. +1
    2 February 2025 19: 48
    An article of amazing precision, balance and knowledge of the author!! Congratulations! Oh, I wish there were more like this on the pages of VO!
  17. +4
    2 February 2025 19: 51
    Thanks to Socialist Bulgaria and its workers - for excellent canned vegetables (beans in tomato sauce 50 kopecks per 400g can), Lecho (I don't remember the price), excellent dry wine - Ludogorskoye, Monastery hut (Bel. - 2 rubles 50 kopecks), Bear's blood (2 rubles 70 kopecks), brandy Sunny Breg (I don't remember the price), cigarettes made from real tobacco - Opal, BT and so on.
    Now it is clear to everyone what we have all lost.
  18. +2
    2 February 2025 19: 57
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    Quote: V.
    Maybe leave her alone and let her live as she wants.
    As long as Bulgaria supplies weapons to Ukraine and takes part in sanctions against our country, it cannot be left alone under any circumstances

    Come on, they slander that Lukoil structures and Timchenko’s enterprises supplied oil and fertilizers all the way to Bulgaria.
    This is different, right?
  19. +4
    2 February 2025 19: 59
    Quote: stoqn477
    And what about the Alyosha monument in Bulgaria now?

    Unfortunately, it still hangs over Plovdiv.

    It's a pity you're not hanging around nearby - they didn't finish the job in 1945...
    1. +2
      2 February 2025 20: 19
      Russia, end the SVO as soon as possible. With a crushing victory. And the Bulgarian fascists themselves will hang ... on the chassis of American planes. Reference - Kabul-21.
  20. +2
    2 February 2025 20: 02
    Quote: gsev
    But in fact it was Yeltsin who stopped the collapse of the country by ceding power to Putin.

    No one stopped the collapse - it continues and is currently in a latent phase.
  21. +2
    2 February 2025 20: 05
    Thanks to the author for the article - it's interesting to learn new things first-hand, from the other side.
  22. -1
    2 February 2025 21: 34
    Planet of iron, ugh, Bulgaria. No food, no minerals, no brains and no conscience. Populated by idiots... Bulgarians.
  23. +1
    3 February 2025 00: 06
    "To take revenge on neighbors and avoid participation in the meat grinder of war - Bulgaria in WWII"

    Most people take goodness from other people for granted, as something worthless.
    Countries are run by people. So why should some countries remember good things from other countries?
    Even at the everyday level, we remember for a long time not the teenager who gave up his seat on the bus to an old lady, but the teenager who pretended to be asleep.

    And yes... I still remember my neighbor, how he kept me from sleeping after lunch with a hammer drill 7 years ago!
  24. 0
    3 February 2025 10: 37
    The author lied... And how interestingly. He mentioned the Bulgarian Waffen-SS brigade... But for some reason he didn't mention that transports were going from Turkey to Bulgarian and Romanian ports with cargo, primarily chrome, and that Bulgaria was conducting anti-submarine warfare against the Black Sea Fleet submarines, laying mines and conducting aerial reconnaissance.
    And at least one Soviet submarine was blown up and destroyed by mines laid by the Bulgarians.
    There is also reason to believe that several more submarines of the Black Sea Fleet were lost as a result of Bulgarian air strikes. And surface ships of the Bulgarian Navy were hunting for Soviet submarines that were attacking Italian and German cargo transports and tankers.
    The author doesn't say a word about this either...
    In general, according to the author, Bulgarians are good guys...
  25. 0
    3 February 2025 10: 57
    The Black Sea Fleet lost five submarines off the coast of Bulgaria. Of these, one or two were lost in air attacks. And these were clearly not the Luftwaffe.
    1. +4
      3 February 2025 13: 05
      In 1945, Bulgarian troops took part in repelling the last major German counteroffensive near Balaton. They made a significant contribution to the success of our troops. They suffered significant losses but did not flee or give up their positions.
  26. +2
    3 February 2025 16: 29
    Quote: Grencer81
    The Black Sea Fleet lost five submarines off the coast of Bulgaria. Of these, one or two were lost in air attacks. And these were clearly not the Luftwaffe.

    Very high assessment of the anti-submarine capabilities of the Bulgarian Air Force. Unfortunately or fortunately they did not have such successes. Soviet boats were lost to mines - German, Romanian, Bulgarian and Soviet. Most of the Bulgarian ships and vessels were also lost to mines.
    1. -1
      3 February 2025 17: 19
      Did the Luftwaffe really try that hard? More excuses, excuses, excuses...
  27. +3
    3 February 2025 17: 23
    Firstly, in the 19th century no one threatened us with total destruction. Will the Sultan cut off the branch on which he sits and which feeds him?

    Without Russia, it would have been impossible for Bulgarian, Greek, Serbian, Armenian and maybe some other states to emerge. The Sultan certainly had no plans to destroy this population, but he certainly did not want to create independent states from these peoples of the empire. The fate of the Kurds or Palestinians is a good example of what awaited us and some other small peoples of the Ottoman Empire. The fact that our national interest (has its own Bulgarian state) coincided with the Russian national interest is wonderful. The strongest connection between the two peoples is their common geopolitical interest. And since modern Bulgaria was created by Russian geopolitical interest, then the defeat and disintegration of Russia will be a death sentence for the existence of the Bulgarian state. A Bulgarian who does not understand this is like those boyars who destroyed medieval Bulgaria in the 14th century.
    Secondly. You are not saving us from World War II. There is no one to save us from. We are not occupied and crushed. We have a functioning state with all its systems. Even if it is small and weak. Our only problems are with the partisans who rise up on your orders, mind you. There were no partisans before June 22, 1941. Do you see the connection?

    The problem with the partisans was the most insignificant for the monarchist-fascist regime of Bulgaria in 1944.
    A much more dangerous problem was that of the majority of the Bulgarian people, whose regime was ruled by terror after June 9, 1923 and with the help of external forces.
    But the most catastrophic problem for the regime was its suicidal alliance with Nazi Germany, with which it had linked its fate. Your assertion that we Bulgarians "had no one to save" since Bulgaria was not occupied by the Germans means that the Germans were in Bulgaria as our allies and we did not need to be saved, but rather destroyed as Hitler's allies. This was easy to understand - if there are foreign (German) troops on your territory, they are there either as allies or as occupiers. There is no third option. According to this, the army that drives out the Nazis can be either an occupier or a savior (liberator). Thus, according to you, the Bulgarian people consisted of Nazis and they could not and should not be saved, you think badly of the Bulgarian people.
  28. +2
    3 February 2025 17: 54
    Quote: Grencer81
    Did the Luftwaffe really try that hard? More excuses, excuses, excuses...

    These Soviet boats were not sunk by the Luftwaffe, nor the Romanian, nor the Bulgarian Air Force. They wanted to sink them, they tried, but they could not. The Soviet boats were lost to mines or accidents. Of course, mines were also placed against Soviet boats and ships, to protect shipping near the shore.
  29. +1
    3 February 2025 19: 00
    Rarely an objective article for the Russian media space. Congratulations.
  30. 0
    4 February 2025 00: 56
    Despite all the merits of the article, there are some controversial points, in my opinion. For example:
    But in 1918, like Germany, Bulgaria found itself on the losing side of WWI. But as a result of the defeat, Germany did not lose the German regions themselves. But Bulgaria has again lost lands that were traditional for it, lands that were Bulgarian since the very formation of Bulgaria and populated mainly by Bulgarians.
    After WWI, Germany lost, among other things, the most German regions. Danzig and West Prussia, for example, were much more German (in terms of time) than all of Bulgaria was Bulgarian. wink
  31. +1
    4 February 2025 20: 37
    In 1913, during the Second Balkan War, its neighbors (Serbia, Greece, Romania, Türkiye) seized lands that the Bulgarians considered their own.
    But don't wish Bulgaria as a victim. Both the Serbs and the Bulgarians wanted this war equally. And maybe the Bulgarians wanted to fight even more than the Serbs. From June 23 to June 27, 1913, the troops of both former allies were moving towards the common border and on June 28 they came into contact. At the same time, a diplomatic crisis began between the countries of the former Balkan Union and the Russian Empire, which sought to resolve the conflict peacefully. But no one listened to us. The appointed date for negotiations on the ownership of the disputed territories was crossed out by the military actions that had begun.
    The Bulgarian command's plans included an attack on the Serbs in the south in order to cut off communication between Serbia and Greece. The Bulgarians then planned to attack Skopje and then completely occupy Macedonia.
    The local population was expected to support the Bulgarian army. The Bulgarian government believed that after capturing Skopje, Serbia would agree to all the Bulgarian conditions.
    The Serbs had no plan in case of war.
    At 3 a.m. on June 29, 1913, Bulgarian troops crossed the Macedonian border without declaring war. This came as a surprise to Serbia, which had been expecting negotiations to begin in St. Petersburg. The British ambassador to St. Petersburg, George Buchanan, said: "Bulgaria was responsible for the opening of hostilities. Greece and Serbia fully deserved the accusation of deliberate provocation."
    Initially, the Bulgarians launched an offensive with only five divisions of the 4th Army on the Macedonian Front and the 2nd Army on Salonika. Due to its surprise, the offensive was initially successful. But the 1st Serbian Army, under the command of Alexander Karageorgevich himself, headed towards the Bulgarians. At 19:2, the 11nd Bulgarian Army, with a powerful blow in the direction of Salonika, defeated the Greek advance units. Units of the 2th Division of the XNUMXnd Bulgarian Army reached the coast of the Aegean Sea at the Bulgarian-Greek border and the Struma River.
    On June 30, the Serbs, Greeks and Montenegrins declared war on Bulgaria. King Constantine I of Greece, who personally led the Greek army, gave the order to counterattack. On July 2, the Serbian-Greek troops gradually seized the initiative and began to attack the enemy positions.
  32. +2
    5 February 2025 17: 49
    Quote: Seal
    The Bulgarian command's plans included an attack on the Serbs in the south in order to cut off communication between Serbia and Greece. The Bulgarians then planned to attack Skopje and then completely occupy Macedonia.

    The plans of the Bulgarian command in 1913 are an example of poor operational planning. Of the five armies, only two (2 and 4) actually waged war for several days. The other three (1, 3 and 5) only observed what was happening at that time and began to advance very late and slowly. At the same time, no forces were deployed against the Romans and they entered the 1st and 3rd armies and reached Sofia without encountering any resistance.
    Why the supreme commander (Ferdinand Coburgotsky) and his advisers did not commit hara-kiri or shoot themselves, I do not know.
  33. -1
    11 February 2025 07: 45
    Betrayal is betrayal - the blood of Judas.