"It is a joy to die for your people."

8 190 133
"It is a joy to die for your people."
A monument to Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, erected in the eponymous square on Sovetskaya Street in Tambov. Sculptor Matvey Manizer, 1947.


Women and War


Around a million women fought in the Great Patriotic War. They served as snipers, pilots, signalmen, and anti-aircraft gunners, and worked en masse in military medicine and the army rear. They fought in the partisan movement and underground resistance. There were also female tank crews, artillerymen, and sailors.



Not to mention the millions of women who made a huge contribution to Victory as home front workers, replacing men who went to the front. Drivers, railroad workers, factory and plant workers, and so on.

The ancient tradition of the Amazon warrior maidens defending the borders of Rus' and its cities was revived in the face of a terrible threat.

Thus, Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya (born September 13, 1923) became a true national heroine, a symbol of the heroism of Soviet women and the people. She was the first woman to be awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union (posthumously in 1942).

That's why, during the years of perestroika and reform, when the great Soviet civilization was being destroyed and Soviet mythology was being denigrated and "debunked," there was a particular effort to defile this image. In particular, Zoya Anatolyevna was accused of feeblemindedness, setting fire to village houses, and patriotic fanaticism.

"Partisan" Zoya


Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya was officially considered a partisan. In reality, in October 1941, when Hitler's hordes were rushing toward Moscow and a brutal battle for the survival of Soviet Russia was raging in the central strategic sector, many thousands of the country's best people volunteered for the front. Among them were Komsomol volunteers. In 1941, NKVD officers trained thousands of reconnaissance and sabotage units, who were deployed behind enemy lines.

At the same time, the future saboteurs were made aware of the very high casualty rate among intelligence saboteurs, up to 95%. That prisoners were tortured and executed. Most of the young men remained. For example, at the Komsomol Central Committee, Zoya and other volunteers were personally interviewed by the Secretary of the Moscow City Committee of the Komsomol, Alexander Shelepin (the future head of the KGB), and the heads of the intelligence school.

Zoya Anatolyevna became a cadet at a special school located in the Kuntsevo area (codename: military unit 9903). The school's cadets carried out special missions for the Western Front headquarters in the Mozhaisk direction in accordance with the strict order of the Supreme Command Headquarters, No. 0428, dated November 17, 1941. The essence of this order was scorched earth tactics.

The Soviet General Headquarters, following the example of the Finns in the Winter War and recalling the examples of World War I and the Patriotic War of 1812, tried at all costs to stop the Wehrmacht on the approaches to Moscow. It later became clear that this tactic had failed, but at the time, they did everything possible and impossible to hold the Soviet capital, the nation's largest industrial and transportation center.

On November 20, 1941, two sabotage groups led by Provorov (Zoya was part of his group) and Kraynov were tasked with burning down a number of villages, including the settlement of Petrishchevo in the Vereisky District (now the Ruzsky District). The village housed the headquarters of the 332nd Regiment of the 197th Infantry Division, part of the 4th tank Wehrmacht army. An enemy radio intelligence unit was also stationed there, monitoring the Red Army's radio traffic.

Soviet saboteurs, who as the main weapons Carrying Molotov cocktails, they were ambushed in the village of Golovko and routed. They suffered heavy losses and were scattered. Some were captured. The Nazis brutally tortured and executed Vera Voloshina (born in 1919). In 1994, she was awarded the title Hero of Russia.

On the night of the 27th, Kraynov, Klubkov, and Kosmodemyanskaya managed to set fire to several houses in Petrishchevo where Nazi troops were stationed. After the first raid, Kraynov, not waiting for his comrades at the agreed-upon location, retreated to his own side. Klubkov was captured, began collaborating with the Germans, and was sent for training in the Smolensk area. He was transferred behind the front lines, but there Klubkov was exposed and executed.

On the evening of the 28th, Zoya returned to Petrishchevo to set fire to the stables and other buildings. However, she was captured by sentries.


Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya before her execution. November 29, 1941.

Captivity and execution


The girl was interrogated by German officers with a translator. According to one version, among them was Lieutenant Colonel Ludwig Rüderer, commander of the German 332nd Infantry Regiment of the 197th Infantry Division. Zoya didn't even tell them her real name. She answered all the questions with "no," "I don't know," and "I won't tell." The enraged officers ordered the girl to be beaten. They took her out into the cold, stripped her naked, and beat her with belts. But she remained silent. The abuse continued until morning. Zoya didn't break.

On the morning of November 29, she was taken to the square for execution. Before her execution, Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya said, "I am not alone. There are 200 million of us; you can't hang us all. You will be avenged for me. Soldiers! Surrender before it's too late; victory will be ours!"

Zoya's body hung there for a long time. The cruel people repeatedly desecrated it. Only later were local residents allowed to bury it. Kosmodemyanskaya was later cremated and reburied in Moscow.

On January 12, 1942, Petrishchevo was liberated by Soviet soldiers during the Red Army's counteroffensive. Soon, the entire country learned of Zoya's heroic deed, which embodied the image of selfless Soviet youth. It was through war correspondent Pyotr Lidov's article "Tanya" in the newspaper Pravda. Her surviving comrades, Boris Kraynov and Klavdiya Miloradova, also learned of Zoya's heroism.

Stalin, upon learning of this heroic act, ordered that the Nazi executioners from the 332nd Regiment not be taken prisoner. Whether such an order was issued remains unknown. However, the German 332nd Regiment was destroyed twice: in February 1943 near Smolensk and in the summer of 1944 during Operation Bagration in Belarus. By the end of the war, virtually none of the executioners who perpetrated the atrocities in Petrishchevo remained.

True, regimental commander Rüderer survived and died in West Germany in 1960. So did Colonel Ehrenfried Böge, commander of the 197th Infantry Division, which included the 332nd Regiment. In May 1945, already serving as commander of the 18th German Army and holding the rank of infantry general, he was captured in Courland. On January 12, 1949, a military tribunal of the Moscow Region Ministry of Internal Affairs sentenced him to 25 years' imprisonment. At the request of West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, he was returned to West Germany in 1955 along with other prisoners of war, where he died in 1965.

Zoya's feat became the embodiment of the heroism of Soviet youth, our women, ready for any difficulties and trials in the struggle for the life and freedom of our Motherland.


Petr Lidov's essay "Tanya," Pravda newspaper, January 27, 1942, photo by Sergei Strunnikov

1 application. The execution of Voloshina from the testimony of a witness. // G. Frolov, I. Frolova. Muscovite female partisans - Heroes of the Fatherland. - Moscow, 2004.

“They brought her, poor thing, in a car to the gallows, and there the noose was dangling in the wind. Germans had gathered around, a lot of them. And they brought in our prisoners who had been working behind the bridge. The girl was lying in the car. At first you couldn’t see her, but when they lowered the side walls, I gasped. There she was, poor thing, lying in only her underwear, and even that was torn, and covered in blood. Two Germans, fat ones, with black crosses on their sleeves, climbed into the car, trying to help her up. But the girl pushed the Germans away and, clinging to the cabin with one hand, rose. Her other arm was apparently broken—it hung like a whip. And then she began to talk. At first she said something, apparently in German, and then she switched to ours.

"I," he says, "am not afraid of death. My comrades will avenge me. Our people will win anyway. You'll see!"

And the girl sang. And you know what song? The one that is sung at meetings every time and played on the radio in the morning and late at night.

"International"?

Yes, that very song. And the Germans stood and listened silently. The officer who was commanding the execution shouted something to the soldiers. They threw a noose around the girl's neck and jumped off the vehicle.

The officer ran up to the driver and gave the order to move. He sat there, completely white, apparently not yet accustomed to hanging people. The officer pulled out a revolver and shouted something at the driver in his own language. Apparently, he was cursing loudly. The driver seemed to wake up, and the car pulled away.

The girl still managed to scream, so loudly that my blood ran cold: “Farewell, comrades!” When I opened my eyes, I saw that she was already hanging.”

2 application. Testimony of German prisoner of war, non-commissioned officer of the 10th company of the 332nd infantry regiment of the 197th division, Karl Bayerlein, about the execution of "partisan girls" in the village of Petrishchevo in November 1941. 1942 // Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya: Documents and materials. Moscow, 2011.

“It was on the Russian front in November 1941 of the year. Fields and forests covered with snow. Our battalion departed this night to the village of Petrishchevo, which lies a few kilometers from the front. We were happy to rest and soon fell into the hut. In a small room was crowded. Russian family put up for the night on the street. Only we took a nap as the guards raised the alarm. 4 huts around us were ablaze. Our hut was filled with soldiers left homeless.

The next night, a roar of noise swept through the company and at the same time a sigh of relief — they said that our guards had detained the partisan. I went to the office where two soldiers brought the woman. I asked what this 18-year-old girl wanted to do. She was going to set fire to the house and had 6 gasoline bottles with her. The girl was dragged to the battalion headquarters, and soon the regiment commander, Lieutenant Colonel Rüderer, who had been awarded the knight’s cross, arrived. Through a translator, he wanted not only to achieve recognition, but also to find out the names of assistants. But not a single word fell from the lips of the girl.

The regiment commander trembled with rage. Accustomed to seeing slavishly submissive soldiers around him, he was taken aback. In a harsh, unbroken voice, he ordered her to be stripped to her shirt and beaten with sticks. But the little heroine of your people remained steadfast. She knew nothing of betrayal. Foam formed on our commander's lips—was it rage or his not-quite-abated sadism? His voice broke convulsively: take her out into the cold, into the snow. They continued beating her outside until the order came to carry the unfortunate woman indoors. They brought her. She had turned blue from the cold. Her wounds were bleeding. She said nothing. Only in the morning, after spending the night in an icy room, while being carried half-frozen to the gallows, did she want to address the suffering Russian people with a short speech. A harsh blow from a fist silenced her. The prop was knocked out from under her...

3 application. Description of the execution. // P. A. Lidov. Tanya.

The execution site was surrounded by ten mounted soldiers with drawn sabers. More than a hundred German soldiers and several officers stood around. Local residents were ordered to gather and witness the execution, but few showed up, and some, after arriving and standing for a while, quietly went home to avoid witnessing the horrific spectacle.

Two pasta boxes were stacked one on top of the other under a noose lowered from the crossbar. Tatyana was lifted, placed on the box, and the noose was placed around her neck. One of the officers began to aim his Kodak camera at the gallows; the Germans were fond of photographing executions and beheadings. The commandant motioned to the soldiers acting as executioners to wait.

Tatyana took advantage of this and, turning to the collective farmers, shouted in a loud and clear voice:

"Hey, comrades! Why are you looking so sad? Be brave, fight, beat the Germans, burn them, poison them!"

The German standing next to her swung his arm and wanted to either hit her or cover her mouth, but she pushed his hand away and continued:

"I'm not afraid to die, comrades. It's a blessing to die for my people..."

The photographer had photographed the gallows from a distance and up close, and was now positioning himself to take a side shot. The executioners glanced uneasily at the commandant, who shouted at the photographer:

— Hurry up!

Then Tatyana turned towards the commandant and, addressing him and the German soldiers, continued:

"You're going to hang me now, but I'm not alone. There are two hundred million of us, you can't hang us all. You'll get revenge for me..."

The Russians standing in the square wept. Some turned away, so as not to see what was about to happen. The executioner tugged at the rope, and the noose squeezed Tanya's throat. But she pulled the noose back with both hands, rose up on her toes, and screamed, straining her strength:

— Farewell, comrades! Fight, don't be afraid! Stalin is with us! Stalin will come!..

The executioner pressed his hobnailed boot against the crate, and it creaked on the slippery, packed snow. The top crate fell and hit the ground with a resounding thud. The crowd recoiled. A scream rang out and died away, echoing at the edge of the forest…


Pravda newspaper war correspondent Pyotr Aleksandrovich Lidov (1906-1944) with residents of the village of Petrishchevo—Praskovya Yakovlevna and her husband Vasily Kulik. Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya spent her last night in the Kulik family home. Lidov himself traveled to dangerous parts of the front, flew with a bomber crew behind enemy lines, worked under air strikes, and made forays into German-occupied territories. He wrote about military operations near Smolensk, the partisans of Belarus, the situation in occupied Minsk, and reported from Stalingrad, the Kursk Bulge, the banks of the Seversky Donets and the Dnieper, and the Czechoslovak Corps of Ludvik Svoboda. Lidov, along with Pravda photojournalist Sergei Strunnikov and Izvestia correspondent Alexander Kuznetsov, died on June 22, 1944, during an enemy bombing of an airfield near Poltava, when the Germans successfully attacked the bases of Soviet and American aircraft.
133 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 12+
    17 December 2025 08: 22
    All the words have long been spoken. But the cruel modern world begs the question: how are Kolyaizurengoy and its curators faring?
    1. +4
      17 December 2025 08: 28
      Kolya probably left a long time ago, I don't think people like him can be re-educated anymore.
      1. 10+
        17 December 2025 12: 14
        He simply did and said what his parents taught him. I seriously doubt he had any personal beliefs. Questions for those who orchestrated all of this.
      2. +2
        17 December 2025 13: 29
        Also, on this topic. Did you know he has a Ukrainian last name? And how is the Ukrainian diaspora in Urengoy standing up for this Kolya? By the way, I couldn't find any information about him online today. Everything has been scrubbed.
        1. +3
          18 December 2025 08: 26
          A Ukrainian surname doesn't mean anything, there are Ivanovs and others who don't have Ukrainian surnames, but they are complete bastards
    2. 12+
      17 December 2025 08: 41
      Quote: Gardamir
      All the words have already been said.

      I'd love to hear the assessments of these feats from the various Potanins, Deripaskas, Mordashovs, and other Vekselbergs, Abramovichs, and Rotenbergs... And also from those who were awarded Hero of Russia stars for unknown "outstanding" achievements...
      * * *
      Vera Voloshina is my fellow countrywoman. There's a Vera Voloshina Street in town, a Komsomolsky Park named after Vera Voloshina (we planted trees there in the late 60s and early 70s), and a square named after Vera Voloshina and Yuri Dvuzhilny...
      Blessed memory to the fallen Heroes...
      1. +3
        17 December 2025 12: 03
        There used to be an electric train called "Vera Voloshina"...
        And in Novokuznetsk "Vera Solomina".
      2. +6
        17 December 2025 12: 37
        Words mean little these days. They're just hot air. No one in charge of the market is responsible.
      3. +1
        17 December 2025 13: 07
        During the Soviet era, the Kemerovo book publishing house published the book "Vera Voloshina and Yuri Dvuzhilny".
      4. +1
        19 December 2025 23: 14
        Vera Voloshina was born in Shcheglovsk, Tomsk province. Shcheglovsk, Shcheglovsk forever! 😂😂😂
    3. +9
      17 December 2025 09: 06
      Quote: Gardamir
      But the cruel modern world begs the question: how are Kolyaizurengoy and his curators doing?

      Kolya was stupid in his youth, why judge him, and the curators were the German Friedrich Ebert Foundation, the oldest foundation, educational (?) activities (immediately raises suspicion), there was also a Russian program, which is where Kolya got burned, that is, there were German corrections and amendments in the speech.
      Who's to blame? Probably human greed. The Germans don't just hand out foreign grants to citizens of other countries; they have to earn them.
      In 2022, this educational foundation named after Friedrich was expelled from Russia.
      1. +5
        17 December 2025 10: 48
        Well, first of all, it's not so much the foundation's fault as its parents'. And they're far from ordinary. His father is the head of security at a fuel and energy complex, and his mother is a lawyer. It was their liberal views that were passed on to their offspring.
        1. +1
          17 December 2025 12: 43
          It's very strange that the security guard dad allowed his child to be brainwashed.
          1. +5
            17 December 2025 13: 26
            It's not at all strange. He most likely did it himself. He's the head of the security department at Rosneft. This entire top management doesn't look at the history of their people, but rather at the size of their own profits. And God forbid anyone would encroach on that. Although, in today's reality, this is probably patriotism.
    4. +5
      17 December 2025 10: 16
      "Comrade, remember—here lie the faithful sons of your Fatherland. They fulfilled their duty to the fullest, and did not spare their lives for it. Read and repeat their names. And like them, learn to serve the Fatherland." K. Rylenkov. Engraved on a plaque at the entrance to the Heroes' Memorial Square in Smolensk.
      1. +3
        17 December 2025 10: 40
        Quote from: dmi.pris1
        K. Rylenkov

        Nikolai Ivanovich Rylenkov
        1. +3
          17 December 2025 10: 42
          Exactly, thanks for reminding me. I haven't been to Smolensk for about five years. I wrote it from memory... Smolensk poet.
          1. +3
            17 December 2025 10: 45
            Quote from: dmi.pris1
            Exactly, thanks for reminding me.

            Thank you, I didn’t know that, I asked, and now I know.
    5. +1
      17 December 2025 14: 48
      Quote: Gardamir
      All the words have already been said.

      Oh, really! There was an article on VO recently about Zoya Anatolyevna. I read so many things from forum members, it just gave me goosebumps!!! For example, it turns out Kosmodemyanskaya wasn't tortured!! The arguments were that the Germans learned everything from interrogating her accomplice. But my opponents weren't smart enough to suggest that the interrogation was conducted to refute, confirm, or supplement the accomplice's testimony. In short, I learned a lot of "interesting" things on this discussion forum!
  2. +9
    17 December 2025 08: 54
    There were many female Heroes who laid down their lives on the altar of Victory. Maria Oktyabrskaya, one of them, was the wife of a Red Army commander who died in 1941. She was a tank driver. She was offered a position on the brigade commander's tank (he didn't go into battle). She refused and went to work on a regular tank. The tank was destroyed in the fall of 1943. Maria began repairing the damage and was wounded by a mine fragment. She died in a Smolensk hospital and was buried there near the fortress wall. Hero of the Soviet Union
  3. -3
    17 December 2025 09: 21
    Zoya is certainly a smart woman, a heroine, a patriot - the pride of the country.

    Regarding the destruction of villages:
    Hero of the Soviet Union Baurzhan Momysh-uly, in his book "Moscow is Behind Us," published in Alma-Ata in 1962, writes about the despair and anger of residents of rural houses burned by the Red Army.

    The division's chief of artillery, Lieutenant Colonel Vitaly Ivanovich Markov, came to see us. Apparently, he was still grieving the death of his battle friend and comrade, Ivan Vasilyevich Panfilov, our division commander. <…>

    The snow was melting from the fires. People who hadn't managed to evacuate in time protested, rushed through the streets, and dragged their belongings.

    "You know," he told me sadly, "we've been ordered to abandon our positions and retreat to the next line. And we've been ordered to burn everything in our path of retreat..."
    "What if we don't burn it?" I blurted out.
    - Ordered. We are soldiers.
    "Yes, the order is to burn everything!" I repeated mechanically.
    Houses went up in flames overnight: old ones built by our grandfathers, blackened by time, and brand-new ones, recently built, still smelling of resin. The fires melted the snow. People who hadn't managed to evacuate in time protested, rushing through the streets, dragging their belongings.
    An elderly Russian woman approached us, still retaining her former beauty and slender figure. A downy shawl hung over her left shoulder, and her head, with its silvery, sleek hairstyle, was bare. Her lips were pressed together, and her chest heaved with rapid, labored breathing. She wasn't fidgeting, no—she was a bundle of indignation. And this indignation, coming from this beautiful, slender elderly woman, was terrifying.
    "What are you doing?" she asked Markov sternly.
    “It’s a war, mother, a patriotic war,” I blurted out.
    "And you think our homes aren't our own? Who appointed you commander?" she shouted, and slapped me across the face with all her might. I staggered. Markov pulled me aside...
    The village was burning. We left, illuminated by the flames. Markov walked beside me. We were silent for a long time. I was overcome with resentment: my grandmother didn't beat me, my father didn't beat me, and then...


    The famous saboteur Ilya Starinov described it as harmful from a military point of view
    1. -3
      17 December 2025 12: 41
      Samsonov would have answered you with something like, "When you chop down trees, the chips fly," or "These tactics didn't work, but that's not important." But to pity the Soviet people who found themselves in the occupied zone, carrying out the orders of a wise, efficient manager to destroy their homes, thus condemning them to death—that's Kolya-Urengoyism! That's not our method!
    2. -6
      17 December 2025 13: 03
      No, you had to leave them at home so that the German soldiers of the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS, so dear to your heart, wouldn’t get cold in the winter... Isn’t that right, Mr. Olgovich?
      1. +3
        17 December 2025 13: 19
        Quote: Grencer81
        No, you should have left it at home.

        People should have been evacuated beforehand, including by force.
        1. -3
          17 December 2025 13: 22
          Yes, yes, how were they supposed to evacuate? Even by force. Oh, yes, the Red Army had plenty of vehicles, nowhere to put them? And what about those who didn't want to go or be evacuated? Shoot them?
          Why is everyone so smart in the ass?
          1. -1
            17 December 2025 13: 31
            It's not a matter of hindsight, but of moral superiority over the enemy.
            1. -3
              17 December 2025 13: 35
              So, go back to '41 and tell those who held back the German advance about the "moral superiority." They'll be touched.
              1. +1
                17 December 2025 13: 43
                Look at the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the national battalions and you'll get an answer to what an army that has hatred and expediency, but no moral restraint, is turning into.
                The issue of morale in the army is one of the most important factors in ensuring its combat effectiveness.
                1. -3
                  17 December 2025 13: 45
                  When a war is waged for annihilation, there is no need to read morals...
                  As for the Waffen-AFU, hatred has been cultivated there for many years.
                  1. +2
                    17 December 2025 13: 51
                    Quote: Grencer81
                    When a war is waged for annihilation, there is no need to read morals...
                    As for the Waffen-AFU, hatred has been cultivated there for many years.

                    These are the kinds of reasoning that apparently guided the Ukrainian war criminals who tortured and killed captured soldiers, fired heavy weapons at settlements populated by "separatists," and killed civilians whom our soldiers were trying to save.
                    Aren't you from Urina yourself?
                    1. -5
                      17 December 2025 15: 22
                      And who are you to the Collision of Novy Urengoy? A relative? So, you're now equating the Red Army soldiers and commanders, along with the partisans, with the punitive forces of the Waffen-Air Forces of Ukraine?
      2. +3
        17 December 2025 18: 52
        Quote: Grencer81
        No, you should have left them at home so that the German soldiers of the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS, so dear to your heart, wouldn't get cold in the winter...

        Russian women and children, whom they were unable to protect or evacuate, were left behind. They suffered more from the burnings. Read Starinov

        I hope it's clear that it was your Germans who were the last to end up in the cold, and the Russian children who were the first?

        When a war is waged for destruction, there is no need to read morals.

        So don't tell others what's right.
        1. -4
          18 December 2025 03: 19
          Yes, yes, the kind German soldiers fed the children chocolate, sugar, etc. But the evil Red Army soldiers deprived the children of a roof over their heads...
          We've been hearing this for years now...
          1. +1
            18 December 2025 10: 57
            Quote: Grencer81
            We've been hearing this for years now.

            here, read:
            On November 17, 1941, the Supreme Command Headquarters issued order No. 428:
            "Destroy and burn to the ground all populated areas in the rear of German troops, 40-60 km deep from the front line and 20-30 km to the right and left of the roads. To destroy populated areas within the specified radius of action, immediately deploy aircraft, make extensive use of artillery and mortar fire, reconnaissance teams, skiers, and partisan sabotage groups equipped with Molotov cocktails, grenades, and explosive devices."

            The head finally accepted that it was your Germans who were the last ones to end up in the cold, and the first ones are Russian children?

            The partisans, by the way, very carefully and selectively carried out the order, which came to nothing (and the Red Army left 70 million people under occupation - what would have happened to them?), and Starinov recognized it as meaningless from a military point of view.
            1. -3
              18 December 2025 11: 11
              Your German friends sent Russian children to live in barns, pigsties, or bathhouses, while they themselves occupied their homes...
              Oh, right, right, they also fed you chocolates, didn't they?
              When the Red Army, which Your Excellency hates so much, advanced, houses were transformed into defensive strongholds...
              Yavol?
              1. +2
                18 December 2025 11: 48
                Quote: Grencer81
                Your German friends sent Russian children to live in barns, pigsties or bathhouses.

                The Russian children you hate so much were sent by your German friends to live on the streets, occupying bathhouses and sheds after burned houses.
                1. -3
                  18 December 2025 11: 50
                  Your Excellency hates Russian children... Apparently there are reasons for that.
                  1. +1
                    18 December 2025 11: 56
                    Quote: Grencer81
                    Your Excellency hates Russian children.

                    You, alas for you, read what Russophobic nonsense was written above.
                    1. -3
                      18 December 2025 12: 02
                      There was a war, and this war was one of destruction. In this war, everything that was bad for the enemy was good for the USSR. But you are as much an enemy of the USSR/Russia as a Deutsche Soldaten...
                      And, it seems, according to your words, you feel sorry for the children, but in fact, you are helping the enemy...
                      1. 0
                        18 December 2025 12: 21
                        Quote: Grencer81
                        There was a war going on, and this war was aimed at destruction,

                        not his destruction, got it?
                        Quote: Grencer81
                        everything that is bad for the enemy is good

                        the enemy was in bad shape the last it's your turn, has it arrived?

                        But
                        Quote: Grencer81
                        You are as much an enemy of Russia as the Deutsche Soldaten
                      2. -1
                        18 December 2025 16: 07
                        Well, tell me the story of how kind Deutsche Soldaten und Ofitsieren fed Russian Kinder babies chocolate bars...
                      3. -1
                        18 December 2025 18: 52
                        Quote: Grencer81
                        tell me a story

                        - Verunchik, do it yourself, yourself, yourself! Not in a restaurant, self-service! lol
                      4. 0
                        19 December 2025 08: 21
                        Quote: Grencer81
                        There was a war, and this war was one of destruction. In this war, everything that was bad for the enemy was good for the USSR. But you are as much an enemy of the USSR/Russia as a Deutsche Soldaten...
                        And, it seems, according to your words, you feel sorry for the children, but in fact, you are helping the enemy...

                        Unfortunately, it was much more complicated than that. Watch the film "Cold Summer of '53." It's clear it's fiction, or rather, a descendant's interpretation. It's good that at least now our captured soldiers aren't sent to camps, but back then, that was the norm. Apparently, this also fits into your "good for the USSR" logic. HOWEVER...
                      5. 0
                        19 December 2025 08: 31
                        So, were all the Red Army soldiers who were captured by the Germans sent to camps? Or maybe you'll throw the "Penal Battalion" in there too?
                      6. +2
                        19 December 2025 08: 32
                        By the way, happy holiday! Happy Military Counterintelligence Officer Day!!!
                2. +1
                  18 December 2025 14: 23
                  The Russian children you hate so much were sent by your German friends to live on the streets, occupying bathhouses and sheds after burned houses.
                  Russian children and older youth should not be sent to the streets, but to Germany as slaves
  4. +2
    17 December 2025 10: 33
    Zoya the "Partisan." Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya was formally considered a partisan.
    The author has done a poor job of understanding the issue he is writing about.
    She wasn't a formal member; she was a partisan and wasn't even a member of the military. Kraynov and Klubkov, who were also military personnel, were also partisans.
    Soviet saboteurs who carried Molotov cocktails as their main weapon
    Bottles are not weapons, but special equipment.
    On the morning of November 29, she was taken out to the square for execution.
    The exact date of her execution is unknown, as are her final words before death. It is certain that she did not beg her enemies for mercy, accepted her death with dignity, and before her death, called on people to fight the Nazis.
    Stalin, upon learning of this feat, ordered that the Nazi executioners from the 332nd Regiment not be taken prisoner. Whether such an order was issued remains unknown.
    It is known that to this day such an order has not been published = that it did not exist.

    Zoya's body hung there for a long time. The cruel men repeatedly violated it.
    The same story wanders from publication to publication.
    A whole bunch of unnecessary stories have been fabricated around Kosmodemyanskaya's feat.
    1. -5
      17 December 2025 12: 42
      Samsonov presented us with a digest of Soviet heroic tales about Zoya.
    2. +1
      17 December 2025 13: 05
      In fact, both Kosmodemyanskaya and Voloshina, and their other comrades, served in military unit 9903 (commander-major Sprogis A.K.) and were full-fledged soldiers of the Red Army.
      1. +1
        17 December 2025 13: 28
        Quote: Grencer81
        were full-fledged fighters of the Red Army.

        There's one caveat here: according to the Geneva Convention, military personnel must carry a document (a military ID) and wear a uniform with insignia. The second caveat is that the USSR refused to accede to the Geneva Convention for a number of ideological reasons.
        1. 0
          17 December 2025 13: 33
          It is not true; back in 1931, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs Litvinov declared on behalf of the Soviet government that the USSR would comply with the provisions of the Geneva Convention of 1929.
          As for the military personnel, they wear insignia.
          But for some reason no one reproaches the British "commandos" for not only acting in their uniform, and as soon as the conversation turns to the Red Army, a wild howl from the liberals begins.
          1. 0
            17 December 2025 13: 38
            All armies used saboteurs dressed in civilian clothes or in the uniform of the enemy, but according to the Geneva Convention, saboteurs, mercenaries, and spies do not have the status of prisoners of war.
            1. -1
              17 December 2025 13: 42
              Did the Geneva Convention stipulate war of extermination? And who are partisans considered under it?
          2. +3
            18 December 2025 08: 31
            Quote: Grencer81
            It is not true; back in 1931, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs Litvinov declared on behalf of the Soviet government that the USSR would comply with the provisions of the Geneva Convention of 1929.


            This statement had no legal force, by and large. It required proper signature and ratification. Therefore, the USSR could treat prisoners of war in any manner it chose, and it would not be considered a violation of international law. "No law, no crime."
            1. 0
              18 December 2025 11: 02
              However, the "non-signatory" USSR tried to comply, unlike the signatory and "civilized" Germany.
              1. +1
                18 December 2025 12: 45
                Yes, although I wasn't obligated to, even for moral reasons. Unlike the Reich, which was obligated but didn't adhere to the restrictions. That's the difference between the two "isms."
      2. +1
        17 December 2025 13: 36
        I don’t know what you mean by “full-fledged Red Army soldiers,” I don’t want to guess.
        It is known from documents that the women who fought at the same time as Kosmodemyanskaya (Miloradova, Guseva and many others) did not have military ranks, did not take the oath, and their award lists listed their positions as "partisan detachment fighters."
        I believe that Kosmodemyanskaya had the same "status"
        1. -2
          17 December 2025 13: 40
          From which "documents" exactly? And what about Marat Kazei and Lyonya Golikov, whose soldiers were they? Incidentally, the soldiers of military unit 9903 fought not only behind German lines.
          1. +1
            17 December 2025 14: 53
            From which "documents" exactly?
            From award sheets and award orders.
            And Marat Kazei and Lenya Golikov
            not interested
            By the way, the soldiers of military unit 9903 fought not only in the German rear.
            Please provide a CA document where this is written - I'll be happy to read it to broaden my horizons.
            1. -1
              18 December 2025 11: 01
              I don’t know, I don’t know... Regarding the participation of the soldiers of the military unit, in January 1942 they took part in repelling the German breakthrough.
              1. +2
                18 December 2025 11: 03
                I do not know...
                that's it
  5. +2
    17 December 2025 10: 38
    Today, there are those who continue the legacy of torture and atrocities against everything Soviet—Ukronazi subhumans, cowardly fighting against conscientious fellow citizens, including in Donbas, while simultaneously humiliatingly sucking out yet another Western handout. Their crimes against humanity must not be forgotten after their time.
  6. -1
    17 December 2025 10: 55
    Stalin, upon learning of this feat, ordered that the Nazi executioners from the 332nd Regiment not be taken prisoner. Whether such an order was issued remains unknown.
    By the way, the monument is not the best; during her combat mission, Kosmodemyanskaya did not have a rifle, and she was not wearing a dress and shoes, but trousers and boots.
    But even so, the monument is much better than the one installed on Zoya's grave in Moscow.
  7. +2
    17 December 2025 11: 46
    Unfortunately, the article largely consists of "free" writings by journalists, rather than dry facts from the investigation and criminal cases.
  8. 0
    17 December 2025 12: 58
    Quote: Cympak
    Unfortunately, the article largely consists of "free" writings by journalists, rather than dry facts from the investigation and criminal cases.

    That's not bad either. That means they remember. That means they're thinking about her. That means she's still alive.
  9. -10
    17 December 2025 13: 03
    Several years ago, there was an article here about Zoya. It was a fairly objective attempt to understand what really happened to Zoya, not a collection of Soviet propaganda tales like Samsonov's. But that's Samsonov; he couldn't do otherwise. I sincerely, with all my heart, wish for the author to be among the residents of the occupied village of Petrishchevo in the bitter winter, with their children and elderly parents, where this heroine's group would arrive. Not to evacuate or liberate them, but to carry out the cannibalistic order of an effective manager to "drive the Germans out into the cold," which condemned not the Germans (they would retreat to another village, reinforcing their guard posts) but the unfortunate villagers. I'm 146% certain that in such a case, Comrade Samsonov's judgment would have undergone a radical change before he and his children died of frost and hunger. The problem with the modern assessment of this heroine is that, by modern standards, what she did, following the order to "drive the Germans out into the cold," is clearly and unequivocally interpreted as a war crime under the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977, which were signed and ratified by the USSR and the Russian Federation, its successor. Consequently, the Russian Federation must either terminate the application of these documents on its territory and once again regard its own population in the occupied territories as dust on Comrade Stalin's boots, or stop overdoing its praise of this "heroine."
    1. +1
      17 December 2025 13: 26
      The Geneva Conventions of 1949 were not in force in 1941, so referring to them is liberal hypocrisy.
      The houses in the villages where the Germans established garrisons were in any case occupied by the Deutsche Soldaten, so dear to the liberals, and the owners were sent to the cattle, where the Russian Untermenschen belonged.
      At best, they were driven into a corner.
      1. -6
        17 December 2025 13: 33
        For a liberal, the German soldiers and the ideology they carried are anything but endearing. The fact that the unfortunate inhabitants of an occupied village had their house burned down by "their own" under the pretext that Germans were quartered there doesn't make things any easier for them, even if they had to retreat to their livestock. The Germans would leave the burned-out house, but where would the inhabitants go? To die. In 1949, what had already been clear before that year was simply officially and legally declared—the order to "drive the Germans out into the cold" was a war crime against their own people.
        1. +1
          17 December 2025 13: 38
          And anyway, the Germans were near Moscow, why did they even resist? Paws up, bayonets in the ground, and that was good, right?
          1. -6
            17 December 2025 13: 41
            How did they even manage to show up near Moscow? Where are we supposed to "beat the enemy with a small force on his own territory"?
            1. +2
              17 December 2025 13: 43
              It's different everywhere, but the Red Army in Berlin...
              1. -10
                17 December 2025 14: 26
                And yet, they managed to push the enemy toward Moscow. And a year later, toward the Volga. That's how they "won," burying the Nazis in their own corpses.
                1. +5
                  17 December 2025 15: 33
                  That's how they "won", burying the Nazis under their own corpses.
                  I find such demagogues and propagandists simply touching. laughing
                  You will also claim that the Red Army suffered enormous losses the fascists are not to blame, and the soldiers and commanders of the Red Army themselves, who fought poorly on purpose.
                  It was not Hitler who started the war, but Stalin, who was harboring vile intentions to attack Germany, so Hitler did not attack - he defended himself laughing
                  I believe that this is how it is currently interpreted in German school textbooks, and if it is not yet so, then it won’t be long before it is
                  1. -3
                    20 December 2025 14: 31
                    Under "backward Tsarist Russia," the Germans only reached Riga in three years (1914-17). Under a wise and effective manager, it turned out that never in history had an enemy attacking Russia from the west penetrated so deeply into the country's territory.
                    1. -2
                      21 December 2025 15: 20
                      Your logic is like "if you boil the sea, a lot of fish will cook."
                2. +2
                  18 December 2025 08: 32
                  Here is the true mug of a liberal, again about conquering corpses, hemagogy about why they allowed you into Moscow, people like you need to be crushed
                3. +2
                  18 December 2025 08: 37
                  Well, it is well known how the democrats from “civilized” France fought.
                  Just like how successfully the "democratized" Russian army fought in the "First Chechen War".

                  Who would have doubted it, the "angry liberals" would have shown the worthless Soviets how to fight properly... lol
                  1. -2
                    20 December 2025 14: 35
                    And how were the Russian Armed Forces "democratized" in the early 90s? In 1994-96, it was an army completely tailored to Soviet standards, formed according to Soviet principles, and led by Soviet generals and officers. Only here and there were the stripes slightly changed to the tricolor and double-headed eagle. Indeed, the First Chechen War was lost because the Soviet army was preparing for completely different wars.
                    1. 0
                      26 December 2025 09: 10
                      So. To whom did Soviet generals and officers swear allegiance? And who did they actually serve from 1994 to 1996? "Soviet principles" were flushed down the drain during this period. The army is part of society, and by this time, society was being forced to accept a different ideology and value system, quite liberal ones. But these remained inherently alien to the majority of service members. Even now, few are willing to sacrifice their lives for your "democratic rights and freedoms," including you. I'm sure no amount of bribe would lure you back to the barracks.
                      Well, I don't see the point in talking about changes in army funding, armored vehicle equipment, training, and so on. The army has become a dystrophic simulacrum of its pre-Perestroika self. What kind of wars would those die-hard liberals have prepared our army for? Even our overseas colleagues, with a Pentagon budget, haven't prepared their armies very well for counterinsurgency (as Afghanistan demonstrated).
    2. 0
      17 December 2025 14: 29
      The problem with the modern assessment of this heroine is that by modern standards, what she did, following the order to "drive the Germans out into the cold," is clearly and unequivocally interpreted as a war crime in accordance with the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional Protocols to them of 1977.
      And what specific clause of the Geneva Convention prohibits the destruction of enemy deployment points?
      1. -8
        17 December 2025 14: 32
        According to the Geneva Convention, civilian homes are their homes, not enemy positions that can be destroyed, condemning the civilian population to death. In fact, the text of the Geneva Convention and its Additional Protocols is publicly available. You can read it for yourself.
        1. +2
          17 December 2025 14: 36
          For the Geneva Convention, civilian dwellings are their dwellings, not enemy deployment points,
          You really don't understand the essence of what happened.
          In November 1941, the houses of Petrishchevo no longer belonged to the village residents.
          It was the PROPERTY OF THE 3RD REICH, in which WEHRMACHT SOLDIERS WERE HOUSED, and in some houses with them civilians lived there.
          So see?

          Now I repeat the request: bring specific point Geneva Convention prohibiting the destruction of enemy deployment points
          1. -6
            17 December 2025 14: 59
            Your logic is truly miraculous. In terms of sheer miraculousness, you've even surpassed the judges who issued unjust rulings based on the Dolina effect, depriving bona fide buyers of their homes and money. If the Reich occupied the village of Petrishchi, then it, like the rest of the USSR it occupied, did not become part of the Reich, but remained part of the USSR, illegally occupied. If Reich soldiers occupied the huts of Soviet citizens, they did not become PROPERTY OF THE THIRD REICH, but rather, illegally occupied Soviet citizens' homes. If some Soviet citizens were occupied, they did not become citizens of the Reich, but remained citizens of the USSR, which is obligated to protect them and preserve them from extermination. The notorious "drive the Germans out into the cold" order mandated the complete destruction of all industrial, agricultural, and (!) civilian targets, including residential buildings and civilian food supplies. This constituted a "scorched earth" tactic, which is expressly prohibited by Article 54 of Protocol No. I of the 1977 Geneva Convention, which supplemented and clarified the 1949 Geneva Convention relating to civilian casualties in international and internal conflicts. The USSR signed it that same year and the USSR Armed Forces ratified it in 1989. So, don't just make up your own story about "destroying enemy deployment points." If a country condemns its own population to death under occupation for the sake of destroying "deployment points," then how is it any better than the occupiers? I hope I've answered your curiosity as thoroughly and point by point as possible.
            1. +1
              17 December 2025 15: 07
              You didn't answer my question - You've engaged in demagoguery.

              Once again: in November 1941, the village of Petrishchevo was captured by Wehrmacht soldiers, who settled in the houses that became the site after the capture. property of the 3rd Reich. This was the enemy's deployment point.
              Partisan Z.A. Kosmodemyanskaya attempted to partially destroy this point in order to inflict damage on the enemy of the USSR and weaken the Wehrmacht's combat capability.
              Now I repeat the request: Please provide a specific clause of the Geneva Convention prohibiting the destruction of enemy deployment points.
              1. -7
                17 December 2025 16: 10
                You're the one who engaged in demagoguery, having invented the idea that Soviet citizens' huts became the property of the Reich after their occupation by the Germans. Then, following this logic, all the lands and settlements of the USSR that the Reich captured became part of it. So it turns out that after 1941, the USSR didn't liberate its own territories, but rather seized new German territory. Of course, where did the Geneva Conventions contain what you just now invented?
                1. +1
                  17 December 2025 16: 18
                  You, having independently come up with the idea that the huts of Soviet citizens became the property of the Reich,
                  Should we continue the demagoguery?
                  According to German policy, all territory of the USSR captured by troops became the territory of the 3rd Reich, and corresponding laws were established there.
                  Or maybe you could claim that Wehrmacht soldiers came to Petrishchevo as guests, and the villagers voluntarily rented out their houses to them for money?
                  Then it turns out that the USSR did not liberate its territories after 1941
                  You are either a demagogue or you have straw in your head.
                  According to the LAWS of the USSR, the territory captured by the Wehrmacht was considered OCCUPIED by Germany.
                  And according to the LAWS of GERMANY, the territory of the 3rd Reich.

                  And now FOR THE THIRD TIME I repeat the request: cite a specific point of the Geneva Convention prohibiting the destruction of enemy deployment points.
                  Will I get an answer from you, or will the answer be demagoguery?
                  1. -4
                    17 December 2025 16: 26
                    It seems to me you're lost in the darkness of your own wondrous mind. So, the USSR agreed to the supremacy of Reich law, stating that Soviet lands, including the huts of Soviet citizens, were now the property of the Reich, and therefore the USSR could consider them legitimate military targets? As for your third request, I cannot fulfill it, since it is your own marvelous logical invention, and naturally the drafters of the Geneva Convention couldn't have foreseen such a young, albeit somewhat stubborn, talent as you.
                    1. +1
                      17 December 2025 16: 29
                      As for your third request, I cannot fulfill it, since it is your own miraculous logical invention.
                      Is it a logical notion that Petrishchevo was captured by Wehrmacht soldiers in 41 and a Wehrmacht military unit was stationed there, meaning it was a military facility?

                      Well, a typical demagogue, 100% proof. laughing
                      1. -4
                        17 December 2025 16: 52
                        This was a Nazi-occupied village that needed to be liberated. If, after Petrishchevo's capture by the Germans, the Soviet leadership saw it as a military objective subject to destruction, with no regard for the remaining Soviet residents, then this constitutes a "scorched earth" tactic and a refusal to distinguish between the occupiers and the occupied. This constitutes a war crime. I have already cited the citations and clauses of the convention and its supplement.
                      2. +3
                        17 December 2025 17: 06
                        You are a demagogue and a troll - you have not cited a single point of the Convention, you are lying.
            2. 0
              18 December 2025 03: 02
              It's interesting that the war ended in 1945, but your Excellency is relying on the 1949 Convention...
  10. +3
    17 December 2025 14: 17
    Quote: Olgovich
    The famous saboteur Ilya Starinov described it as harmful from a military point of view
    Starinov’s conclusion is superficial, because it is based on hindsight.
    And I wonder how he assessed the explosions of apartment buildings in Kyiv after the Germans occupied the city, in which hundreds of Soviet civilians died?
    1. -4
      17 December 2025 16: 19
      And who blew up the apartment buildings near Kyiv before the Germans arrived? Who blew up the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station dam before they arrived, triggering the flooding in the lower Dnieper River, killing over a thousand Soviet citizens?
      1. 0
        17 December 2025 16: 22
        And who blew up the residential buildings near Kyiv before the Germans arrived?
        There were explosions of houses after the capture of Kyiv by the Nazis - time bombs, like the explosion in Kharkov
        I don't know about the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station - I haven't studied it.
        1. -3
          17 December 2025 16: 28
          And who planted mines in the houses and blew them up?
          1. +1
            17 December 2025 16: 32
            My dear, only demagogues argue by asking numerous questions.
            And only demagogues stubbornly evade from direct answers to the opponent's questions.
            I'm not interested in a discussion with a demagogue - find yourself a more worthy object for empty talk and demonstration of your demagogic evasions.
            1. -5
              17 December 2025 16: 39
              Then I'll answer these questions myself. It wasn't the Germans who blew up the building on Khreshchatyk after the Germans entered it in the fall of 1941, but the Soviet NKVD hawks. They also blew up the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station dam, and both incidents resulted in numerous civilian casualties. This begs the question: are these victims also included in the 27 million who died in WWII? But then another logical question arises: are these dead Soviet citizens the responsibility of, um (I know the site rules), the bad citizen with the mustache, or the bad citizen with the mustache?
              1. 0
                17 December 2025 16: 41
                Angry liberal, I'm not interested in a discussion with a demagogue - find yourself a more worthy object for your idle talk and demonstration of your demagogic evasions.
      2. +1
        18 December 2025 08: 34
        Stop talking nonsense, there were no deaths of thousands of people, we should try the article on you and a pickaxe in your hands and go to your godfather for nasnst, liberal.
    2. -1
      20 December 2025 10: 00
      *And I wonder how he assessed the explosions of apartment buildings in Kyiv after the Germans occupied the city, in which hundreds of Soviet civilians died?*
      If we recall the questionnaires with the question "Have you or your relatives been to the occupied territories?", the logic of the Soviet leadership was as follows:
      1. Citizens must evacuate.
      2. If they remain, it is their own fault.
      Hence the attitude - it is no longer one's own civilian population, but the enemy's resource.
      After the liberation of the territory, it will again have its own civilian population.
      But which is not trusted, hence this point in the questionnaire.
      1. -1
        20 December 2025 14: 37
        Did all citizens have the opportunity to evacuate? Did the government organize the evacuation of civilians, or were they left to fend for themselves, however they could? In what other country, a participant in World War II, was such an attitude toward its citizens on the part of its government?
        1. +1
          20 December 2025 16: 05
          *In what other country, a participant in the Second World War, was there such an attitude towards its citizens on the part of its government?*
          19.03.1945
          Führer's order, codenamed "Nero"
          “All military installations, transport, communications, industrial and supply installations, food warehouses, as well as material assets on the territory of the Reich that the enemy can use for his own purposes, must be destroyed.*
          "P.S./ If the war is lost, the nation will also perish. This is its inevitable fate. There is no need to concern itself with the foundations that the people will need to continue the most primitive existence." - Hitler's comment on the order. From the testimony of Reich Minister Albert Speer.
          1. -1
            20 December 2025 16: 12
            Well, if we were to draw an owl onto a globe and use the Führer's orders in a dying Reich, living out its final weeks, as an example, then that would be appropriate. That is, there's a nuance. The Führer's order was suicide, a method of heroic death. And an effective manager strove to fight and win in this manner.
            1. +1
              20 December 2025 16: 15
              No owl on the globe. Just facts. Well, and the answer to your question.
              You're not happy? That's how it was.
              1. -2
                20 December 2025 17: 07
                This is an incorrect fact and comparison. Although, if you see the Reich's final weeks of agony as a fact justifying the effective manager's attitude toward his own people, then that's a poor example. And the Reich didn't have time to fully implement this order. Its own Aryan Zoya never emerged.
      2. -1
        21 December 2025 15: 17
        1. Citizens must evacuate.
        2. If they remain, it is their own fault.
        Hence the attitude - it is no longer one's own civilian population, but the enemy's resource.

        It's a bit cynical, but there's probably a fair amount of truth in it.
        1. 0
          21 December 2025 15: 58
          The attitude is not cynical, but rather expedient. This was the management's logic.
          Emotions were the last thing on my mind. That's why I gave such orders.
          1. -2
            21 December 2025 17: 10
            The principle of "sacrifice a small number of the population in order to preserve the majority" is entirely justified when waging war.
  11. -1
    17 December 2025 15: 24
    Quote: Angry Liberal
    If Reich soldiers occupied the huts of Soviet citizens, they did not become PROPERTY OF THE THIRD REICH, but rather illegally occupied housing for Soviet citizens. If some Soviet citizens were occupied, they did not become citizens of the Reich, but remained citizens of the USSR.
    You are either a demagogue or a pro-Western propagandist.
    After the Nazis captured the territory of the USSR, according to German law, all captured property became the property of the 3rd Reich, or, at best, the temporary property of the people to whom it had previously belonged.
    For example, the Germans could temporarily allow the former owners of a village house to live there so they could work for Germany in a local labor cooperative. But they could also kick the residents out at any time without compensation, and use the house for their own needs or burn it down.
    And those who lived in the captured territories, again according to German laws, were not citizens, but untermenschen, with the same rights as their horses.
    And now propagandists like you are trying in every possible way to make these facts forgotten - rewrite history that whitewash the fascists and to denigrate the Soviet people who destroyed these beasts by any means necessary.
    1. -5
      17 December 2025 16: 16
      So, for you, the laws of the Reich regarding the housing and property of Soviet citizens in the occupied territories take precedence? And based on Reich laws, the USSR could destroy the homes of Soviet citizens, condemning them to death from cold and hunger? How charming! As for the Germans' attitude toward occupied Soviet citizens, I agree, they were treated like cattle. But it turns out that even an effective manager treated his own (!) citizens no better. He didn't value their lives at all!
      1. 0
        17 December 2025 16: 20
        That is, for you the priority laws are the laws of the Reich,
        And on the basis of the laws of the Reich, the USSR could destroy the homes of Soviet citizens,
        Have you decided to invent some schizophrenic nonsense and then attribute its authorship to me?
        A typical demagogue

        And now I will repeat the request FOR THE FIFTH TIME: cite a specific point of the Geneva Convention prohibiting the destruction of enemy deployment points.
        Will I get an answer from you, or will the answer be demagoguery?
        1. -5
          17 December 2025 16: 34
          The Geneva Conventions require parties to a conflict to distinguish between the civilian population and direct participants in hostilities (combatants) in order to ensure the protection of civilians and civilian objects. This fully applies to the homes of civilians under occupation. If a party to a conflict fails to distinguish between occupying soldiers and the occupiers of a civilian hut, and considers the entire hut worthy of destruction because the presence of enemy soldiers makes it an enemy "station," this is a clear indication of scorched earth tactics, which are expressly prohibited by the Additional Protocols to the 1977 Geneva Accords.
          1. +1
            17 December 2025 16: 35
            Angry liberal, I'm not interested in a discussion with a demagogue - find yourself a more worthy object for your idle talk and demonstration of your demagogic evasions.
  12. +1
    17 December 2025 20: 36
    I had a pioneer squad "named after Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya" at school...
    Regarding the order not to take prisoners from the 332nd Pook. Where then does the "Testimony of German prisoner of war, non-commissioned officer of the 10th company of the 332nd infantry regiment of the 197th division, Karl Bayerlein, about his execution in November 1941..." come from?
    1. +2
      17 December 2025 22: 54
      Yes, this order is a fairy tale.
      I once came across an interesting book, published in a small print run in the late 90s. It contained the memoirs of veterans, not senior officers, but junior and mid-level commanders.
      One of them told an interesting story about prisoners of war.
      Apparently, the order was not to kill prisoners, but to deliver them to the rear and hand them over. Moreover, shooting prisoners could land you in a penal unit.
      But many who lost family and friends harbored a fierce hatred for the Nazis. Such people were not taken prisoner.
      Or it would happen like this: after an attack, I had 12 men left in my platoon. And then a dozen Fritzes surrender. So I needed to send someone to the rear as an escort. Because if I sent them alone, they might pick up their weapons and stab them in the back.
      And the enemy can launch a counterattack at any moment - every fighter counts.
      The solution is simple: raise the PPSh, fire a couple of bursts, and the problem is solved.
      War is a terrible thing. I remember how our grandfathers would gather on May 9th, have a drink, and then tell us boys: all your difficulties are nonsense, the main thing is that war doesn’t befall you.
      1. +1
        18 December 2025 03: 09
        A war veteran, a recipient of three Orders of Alexander Nevsky, lived in our building. He once told a story at school about what they did to the Germans. He was never invited back to school again.
        And my grandfather was a rock! From December 41, he served as a platoon and company commander throughout the war!
    2. +1
      18 December 2025 03: 09
      And our whole school was named after her.
  13. +1
    18 December 2025 08: 27
    Quote: Cympak
    The second point is that the USSR did not join the Geneva Convention for a number of ideological reasons.


    Which was absolutely irrelevant! Germany had signed and duly ratified both the Geneva and Hague Conventions. And according to their provisions, a country that had signed these conventions was obligated to abide by their terms even with respect to countries that had not signed and ratified them properly, such as the USSR.
  14. +1
    18 December 2025 08: 41
    Quote: Angry Liberal
    According to the Geneva Convention, civilian homes are their homes, not enemy deployment points that can be destroyed, condemning the civilian population to death. In fact, the text of the Geneva Convention and its Additional Protocols is publicly available.


    Since the USSR neither signed nor ratified this convention properly, the USSR was not obligated to comply with its provisions. Your opinion is irrelevant, but what was said about this at the Nuremberg Tribunal? What verdict did that tribunal reach regarding the USSR's methods of war? Was the USSR condemned? No? Well, then, go ahead and take your complaints.
    1. -1
      19 December 2025 10: 27
      A person freely comments on the content of the conventions.
      In his comments it turns out that according to the Geneva Conventions the village of Petrishchevo was inviolable, and if the fascists occupied it, then they also became inviolable.
      And if they set up a defensive stronghold in this village, then the Red Army troops during the offensive they had no right to shell this village, because the shelling would damage civilian homes and could kill civilians.
      Demagogic nonsense - there is no such requirement in any convention
      1. 0
        19 December 2025 13: 23
        Quote: Marrr
        A person freely comments on the content of the conventions.


        Conventions have nothing to do with this. The USSR was not obligated to observe them; it was outside their limitations. So there's no need to discuss them.
        1. -1
          19 December 2025 16: 55
          You can discuss it, but you can't distort the content.
  15. +1
    18 December 2025 12: 52
    Quote: Angry Liberal
    So, for you, the laws of the Reich regarding housing and property of Soviet citizens in the occupied territories take priority?


    Priority is given to those laws that actually apply in a given territory at a given time. We must proceed from the actual state of affairs, not engage in verbal casuistry.
    1. 0
      18 December 2025 14: 35
      All these international laws are sheer hypocrisy.
      When military operations are underway, the opposing sides do not observe them, and after the wars are over, only the vanquished are condemned for not observing them.
      1. 0
        19 December 2025 13: 58
        Quote: Marrr
        All these international laws are sheer hypocrisy.
        When military operations are underway, the opposing sides do not comply with them,


        Well, it depends. Incidentally, the Reich observed the conventions for the treatment of prisoners of war with regard to the British and the Yankees. The British and the Yankees also treated German prisoners quite politely. Not so with the Japanese. But the Japanese also treated their prisoners extremely harshly.

        In short, international law is nothing but double standards. When it doesn't conflict with strategic interests, the norms can be observed. But when it does, it's irrelevant. Interests are more important than formalities.
        1. 0
          19 December 2025 16: 53
          The Reich complied with the provisions of the conventions for the treatment of prisoners of war.
          I'm not talking about prisoners of war, but about methods of waging war.
          When fighting was going on, the preservation of the population's property was the last thing they cared about, as was the preservation of civilian lives.
          And those who won judged, and naturally only the vanquished were guilty.
          1. 0
            20 December 2025 07: 18
            The treatment of prisoners of war is also part of the methods of waging war.
            The Germans were acquitted on some counts at the Nuremberg Tribunal.
  16. Des
    0
    18 December 2025 18: 20
    Thank you for the article.
    It doesn't matter how I feel about the author.
  17. 0
    18 December 2025 19: 52
    So that the marked bear and Yakovlev's lackey will forever spin, twirl and boil in cauldrons in hell... Dig up, burn and scatter the ashes of these scoundrels.
  18. 0
    19 December 2025 07: 54
    Quote: Olgovich
    The famous saboteur Ilya Starinov described it as harmful from a military point of view

    Note that during the years he spoke of this, while during Stalin's time, he remained silent and didn't write angry letters to Stalin or any high-ranking officials. Why isn't important, the important thing is the fact itself.
  19. 0
    19 December 2025 13: 19
    So, I don't get it: where are the "bun," "tram," and "matches"? Why aren't they there?! Could it be that Mr. Medinsky lied?!
  20. 0
    20 December 2025 16: 59
    Good article, and regarding the comments, Stalin was right in his time when he purged treason wherever possible. I think this helped a lot in WWII, but unfortunately, the liberals survived and destroyed the USSR.
  21. 0
    21 December 2025 12: 48
    Hmm... At the beginning, there is a witness's testimony, according to which the hanging took place right in the back of a truck, and at the end, other testimony mentions pasta boxes and an executioner.