Mikhail Frunze. The End of the Civil War in Southern Russia and Aid to Mustafa Kemal

9 778 166
Mikhail Frunze. The End of the Civil War in Southern Russia and Aid to Mustafa Kemal
M. Frunze in Turkey


In previous articles, we discussed Mikhail Frunze's revolutionary activities and successful career as a Soviet military leader, including victories over Kolchak and Wrangel. Today, we'll continue that story.



The end of the civil war in Ukraine


Thus, Crimea was liberated. Then, in November of that same year, 1920, Red Army units finally routed Petliura's forces in the so-called Ukrainian People's Republic (UNR), which had been established by local nationalists led by Volodymyr Vynnychenko and Petliura on November 13, 1918, and which had constantly fought against Soviet Russia, including on the side of Poland. At the same time, the problem of Nestor Makhno's anarchist republic was also resolved. Makhno had fought four times on the Bolshevik side and was awarded the Order of the Red Banner, but he only carried out orders that pleased him, and so all attempts at alliance ended in yet another rupture and confrontation.


S. Korolkov, “In Makhno’s Camp,” 1931


Makhnovists in a photograph from 1920.

And so it was that Semyon Kolesnikov's Makhnovist brigade, along with the Red Army, crossed the Sivash on November 8, 1920. However, after their victory over Wrangel, the Makhnovists again disobeyed the order of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Southern Front, refusing to leave Crimea for the Caucasus, and were attacked by Red Army units.

On December 7, 1920, the remnants of Makhno's forces managed to cross the Sivash River again and reunite near the village of Novospasovka in the Berdyansk district. According to Makhno's chief of staff, V. Belash, the old man still had approximately 3,500 cavalry, up to 5,000 infantry, 16 artillery pieces, and 500 machine guns. But now the decision was made to finally liquidate the intractable old man's anarchist republic.

For the same reason and for the same considerations, the Zaporizhian Sich was dispersed by order of Catherine II. Both the Zaporizhian Cossacks and the Makhnovists had lost their importance as military allies, but they refused to disarm. The Zaporizhian Cossacks refused to become service Cossacks, and the Makhnovists refused to become regular army soldiers. So, in the midst of peaceful territory, in both cases, lands were occupied by an illegal armed formation led by some "shady" atamans who disobeyed the orders of the central government and lived by their own laws. And believe me, the French government would never have tolerated some anarchist republic in Normandy, the British government in Wales, the American government in Arizona, the Spanish government in Catalonia, and so on. Catherine II and the Bolsheviks didn't tolerate it either. The overly independent and headstrong Zaporizhian Cossacks were dispersed by Peter Tekeli. And Makhno was forced to flee to Romania by Mikhail Frunze.

On March 16-17, 1921, the 9th Cavalry Division defeated the main forces led by Batka himself, capturing the office, the convoy and artilleryMakhno narrowly escaped capture but managed to escape, and by early May he had assembled a new detachment of approximately 4 men, 190 machine guns, and 8 cannons. However, he no longer had any chance of victory. On June 13, 1921, near the village of Nedrigailov (in what is now Sumy Oblast), Makhno suffered a decisive defeat in a battle against the 8th Cavalry Division of the Red Cossacks. His closest collaborator, the former anarchist sailor Feodosiy Shchus, was killed there.


Nestor Makhno and the very stylish anarchist Feodosiy Shchus (to his right)

The remnants of Makhno's forces fled to the Romanian border—only 78 men made it. On August 28, 1921, the seriously wounded Nestor Makhno was transported to the right bank of the Dniester by Lev Zinkovsky (Zadov), who would become the hero of A. N. Tolstoy's novel "The Road to Calvary." Soon, this head of Makhno's intelligence and counterintelligence services, as well as the head of his personal security, would return home and join the Cheka. He would become the authorized representative of the OGPU Foreign Department for the Odessa region and the senior authorized representative of the 3rd (counterintelligence) Department of the Odessa NKVD, organizing an agent network of Russian émigrés in Romania.


Chekist L. Zinkovsky with colleagues

And for Frunze, it was the defeat of Makhno’s troops that ended his participation in the civil war.

Business trip to Turkey


On October 31, 1918, aboard the British ship Agamemnon, Turkish representatives were forced to sign the Armistice of Mudros, which effectively became the country's act of capitulation. And the following day, the British newspaper The Times solemnly informed its readers:

Access to the Straits will give us not only control over the Black Sea, but also the best opportunity to influence Russian affairs. For now, the Black and Baltic Seas are closed to us. fleetOur naval power cannot influence Russia's future. Siberia and Murmansk are, at best, inconvenient back doors. But with the British fleet in the Black Sea, the front door is open. The Allies' imminent dominance over the Black Sea will sound the death knell for Bolshevik rule in Russia.

Words were matched by deeds, and on November 23, 1918, the British cruiser Canterbury entered the port of Sevastopol. Two days later, she was joined by four battleships (two British, one French, and one Italian), two cruisers, and nine destroyers. I think you now understand why the government of Soviet Russia was so willing to cooperate with Mustafa Kemal (the future Atatürk): it was vitally important to help the bleeding young Turkish Republic restore both its sovereignty and control over the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits.

Things were looking very bad for the Turks. Since November 18, 1918, the "Allied Aegean Squadron"—167 warships and auxiliary ships of various ranks, including 14 battleships, 14 cruisers, 11 gunboats and monitors, and 17 destroyers—was moored in Constantinople harbor.


French warship in the harbor of Constantinople


English sailors and soldiers at the Galata Tower

An Entente army of 49,516 soldiers and 1759 officers was stationed in Constantinople. And the French General d'Esperey, emulating Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror, triumphantly rode into Constantinople on horseback (the occupation forces remained there for five years, until the army of Mustafa Kemal, now nicknamed Gazi—the invincible, but not yet Atatürk—approached the city).


D'Espere's entrance to Constantinople

The British occupied forts in the straits, the French occupied Cilicia, and both divided Turkey's African possessions between them. The Greeks moved their troops into Smyrna. The Italians occupied southwestern Anatolia and the Dodecanese Islands (part of the Southern Sporades archipelago). Plans were made to establish a Kurdistan state on Turkish territory.

In May 1919, the so-called Second Greco-Turkish War began, in which the Turks initially suffered defeats.

The Chairman of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal (elected April 23, 1920), approached V. I. Lenin with a proposal to establish diplomatic relations and a request for assistance in the struggle "against imperialist governments." Two treaties were signed: "On Cooperation" (August 24, 1920) and "On Friendship and Brotherhood between the RSFSR and Turkey" (March 16, 1921). It should be noted once again: for Soviet Russia, it was vital to close the Black Sea straits to Entente warships, and therefore this alliance was mutually beneficial.

Mikhail Frunze was also sent to Turkey: on November 4, 1921, he and a group of military advisers departed Kharkov for Batumi by train. In Batumi, on November 25, they all boarded the Italian steamship Sannago, bound for Trebizond. Naturally, the mission was secret, and the Soviet soldiers traveled under false names (Frunze obtained the documents of a certain merchant, Mikhailov). In Samsun, Frunze was met by S. I. Aralov, a former staff captain in the Tsarist army, the first head of the Registration Directorate of the Field Headquarters of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Red Army, and later one of the founders of the GRU.


Colonel S. Aralov during the Great Patriotic War

On December 13, the Soviet delegation arrived in Ankara, where the "masks" were dropped, and Frunze now acted as the head of the extraordinary embassy of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic—and was received with all due honors. He addressed the deputies of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, and Mustafa Kemal declared in his response:

The mere fact that the Soviet government sent Frunze, one of the outstanding political figures, who was also one of the most valiant commanders and heroic leaders of the victorious Red Army, to Ankara, evoked special gratitude from the National Assembly.

The visit did not go unnoticed abroad. The Berlin newspaper "Rul" wrote:

In connection with the arrival in Angora of the third Soviet representative, Aralov, with a mission consisting entirely of General Staff officers, Greek newspapers report that the presence in Angora of three authorized Soviet representatives (Frunze, Aralov, and Frumkin) indicates the intention of the Bolsheviks to take control of military operations in Anatolia.


M. V. Frunze with his colleagues in Ankara, 1922.

On January 2, 1922, the Treaty of Friendship and Brotherhood was signed between Turkey and the Ukrainian SSR.

Frunze managed to visit the active troops and offer some advice on their organization. Afterward, he left Turkey and returned to Kharkov. Aralov, however, remained: from January 5, 1921, to April 29, 1923, he served as the Plenipotentiary Representative (Ambassador) of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to Turkey. He recommended creating a shock cavalry corps of three divisions, which had previously operated separately. This gave birth to the Turkish "cavalry army," which performed brilliantly in battle, and its commander, Fahrettin, was nicknamed "our Budyonny" by the Turks. Aralov made numerous visits to the front and provided Mustafa Kemal with significant assistance in planning and preparing the general counteroffensive of August 1922.


Mustafa Kemal, Ismet Pasha (Inönü), the RSFSR Plenipotentiary Representative S. Aralov, and Military Attaché K. Zvonarev in the vicinity of Konya during preparations for the general offensive of Turkish troops against the Greek army. March 23, 1922.

The importance of his involvement in Turkish affairs can be judged by the famous Republic Monument in Taksim Square in Istanbul: Mustafa Kemal Atatürk ordered the placement of sculptures of Voroshilov and Aralov to his left.




Sculptural images of Voroshilov and Aralov

Aralov's achievements are obvious, but why Voroshilov ended up at Atatürk's side remains a big question. Apparently, not all the archives have been opened yet, and somewhere lie documents revealing this man's role in Turkey's victory over the Greeks and the restoration of its independence.


President of the Republic of Turkey Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and the head of the Soviet delegation, Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR K. E. Voroshilov at the military parade on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the founding of the Republic, October 29, 1933.

On August 18, 1922, the Turkish army under Mustafa Kemal launched an offensive and defeated the Greeks at the Battle of Dumlupınar on August 30. Building on their success, the Turks liberated Bursa on September 5 and Smyrna on September 9-11. About a third of the Greek army managed to evacuate on British ships. Approximately 40 Greek soldiers and officers were captured, and 284 artillery pieces, 2 machine guns, and 15 aircraft were captured.

On October 14, 1922, the war ended with a complete victory for the Turkish Republic. This victory was achieved largely thanks to the financial and material assistance of our country. In total, Turkey received 6,5 million gold rubles, 33,275 rifles, 57,986 million rounds of ammunition, 327 machine guns, 54 artillery pieces, 129,479 shells, and 1,500 sabers. Two Black Sea Fleet ships, the Zhivoy and the Zhutkiy, were also returned. The gunboats, whose crews had taken them to Sevastopol to avoid surrender to the British, were also returned.

The Turks proved to be grateful and made every effort to assist the Red Army in the Caucasus and Transcaucasia. The commander of the Eastern Army, General Karabekir Pasha, wrote to Halil Pasha and Nuri Pasha:

For the Bolsheviks to appear on Turkey's borders, the immediate seizure of the entire Caucasus would be necessary. Even their small forces, by entering Azerbaijan and advancing with the Azerbaijanis to the Turkish border, would benefit Turkish interests. It would be very opportune to secure the Bolsheviks' rise to power in Azerbaijan, Dagestan, and Georgia.

Turkish agents in Azerbaijan prevented the Musavatists from blowing up the oil rigs (the economic damage would have been enormous) and organized the virtually bloodless entry of the 11th Army into Baku. Ordzhonikidze wrote to Lenin:

Turkish askers and officers played a very active role in favor of the revolution in Baku, a detachment of which prevented the government from escaping from Baku.

The Turks retained their gratitude to the USSR even after the death of Kemal Atatürk—unlike the Bulgarians and Romanians, whose independence was paid for with the blood of Russian soldiers and officers. Atatürk's successor, İsmet İnönü, prevented Turkey from entering World War II on the side of Germany. In 1953, he (then the leader of the opposition Republican People's Party), upon learning of Stalin's death, was the first to arrive at the Soviet embassy, ​​writing in the book of condolences:

A man who personified an era has passed away, someone I personally knew and, while not always agreeing with, held in high esteem! With Stalin's name, this era was equally linked to yours and ours. historyDuring wars, our countries often fought against each other, but during the years of revolutions and immediately after them, we were together and helped each other.

In the next article, we'll conclude our story about Frunze. We'll discuss his work as Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council and People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs. And we'll also discuss the unexpected death of this extraordinary man.
166 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +15
    30 January 2026 04: 57
    Thank you Valery!
    Seriously speaking, it turned out to be a pretty good series about Frunze and the events surrounding him.
    hi
    1. +21
      30 January 2026 05: 16
      I categorically join you!
      Makhno was awarded the Order of the Red Banner
      There is no documented evidence that Nestor Makhno was awarded the Order of the Red Banner.
      1. +7
        30 January 2026 05: 41
        The Turks maintained their gratitude to the USSR even after the death of Kemal Ataturk – unlike the Bulgarians and Romanians
        But over time they forgot...
        1. +6
          30 January 2026 06: 36
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          The Turks maintained their gratitude to the USSR even after the death of Kemal Ataturk – unlike the Bulgarians and Romanians
          But over time they forgot...

          It's not the Turks who have forgotten, but Erdogan who has become an Islamist...
          1. +6
            30 January 2026 08: 06
            Quote: Konnick
            Quote: Uncle Lee
            The Turks maintained their gratitude to the USSR even after the death of Kemal Ataturk – unlike the Bulgarians and Romanians
            But over time they forgot...

            It's not the Turks who have forgotten, but Erdogan who has become an Islamist...

            There was a lot of other stuff there before Erdogan.
            And Russia is not the USSR.
        2. +5
          30 January 2026 08: 15
          Quote from Uncle Lee
          But over time they forgot...

          The service provided is worth nothing.
        3. +6
          30 January 2026 09: 04
          The Turks maintained their gratitude to the USSR even after the death of Kemal Ataturk – unlike the Bulgarians and Romanians
          But over time they forgot...

          Nevertheless, the attitude towards Russians in Turkey is an order of magnitude better than in Britain or France, not to mention Sweden or Poland.
          As for Erdogan, he's certainly in a difficult position. The country is a NATO member, and the pressure is enormous, yet he hasn't imposed sanctions against Russia, air travel remains open, and Istanbul is now a gateway to Europe and other countries. The downed plane was likely a provocation by Western intelligence agencies, given that the Turkish pilot was implicated in a plot against Erdogan.
        4. +5
          30 January 2026 09: 30
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          The Turks maintained their gratitude to the USSR even after the death of Kemal Ataturk – unlike the Bulgarians and Romanians
          But over time they forgot...

          Why did they forget—they took Kars, Erzurum, and other cities from Russia, kept a huge army on our border during WWII, deployed US missiles to attack the USSR—where did the Cuban Missile Crisis come from?
          and so on and so forth,
          1. +8
            30 January 2026 09: 35
            You'd think the Turks themselves deployed the American missiles, and then removed them themselves after the Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved.
            Kars and Erzurum, however, were not taken away, but rather returned. Erzurum itself was captured by Russian troops in February 1916, and it's questionable whether it would have become part of the empire after the war.
            1. +3
              30 January 2026 09: 40
              Quote: vet
              You'd think the Turks had deployed the American missiles themselves.

              Yeah, the Americans placed it themselves, without the Turks' consent. lol
              1. +4
                30 January 2026 09: 45
                The Americans have questioned and continue to question many people. Their bases in Europe are effectively occupation forces. And what about Guantanamo Bay, Cuba? They mockingly transfer $4085 a year, refuse to raise the rent, and refuse to leave.
              2. +2
                30 January 2026 10: 54
                Quote: Olgovich
                Quote: vet
                You'd think the Turks had deployed the American missiles themselves.

                Yeah, the Americans placed it themselves, without the Turks' consent. lol

                You might ask why Türkiye joined NATO. Besides, as I already said, there were a lot of things going on there after Atatürk. There were military coups and repressions against socialists.
            2. +3
              30 January 2026 10: 35
              Quote: vet
              The same Erzurum was taken by Russian troops in February 1916, and it is still a question whether it would have become part of the empire after the end of the war.

              And who would interfere?
              1. +2
                30 January 2026 10: 37
                And who always got in the way? For example, at the Berlin Congress of 1878?
                1. +2
                  30 January 2026 10: 45
                  Quote: vet
                  And who always got in the way? For example, at the Berlin Congress of 1878?

                  Well, look. During the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78, England was officially neutral, supporting Turkey. And at that time, it was doing everything it could to impede Russia's advance into the Transcaucasus and the Straits.
                  In 1917, England was an ally, an agreement had been reached regarding the Straits. Had our landing in the Straits been successful, no one would have even considered pushing Russia out of there. Not to mention mainland Turkey—England no longer had the strength to influence Russia.
                  Therefore, all the talk in the style of “who would allow us” is in favor of the poor.
                  And history shows us time and again that control of the Straits means security for the entire Russian south.
                  But apparently not everyone is given the ability to understand this.
                  1. +6
                    30 January 2026 10: 52
                    No one would ever have given up the Black Sea straits to Russia. Russia had no reason to enter World War I; neither Austria nor Germany had any territorial claims against it at the time. And Russia no longer laid claim to the western lands—it had enough problems with the Poles; they had already realized that their lands didn't need to be annexed. So they shoved the "carrot" of the Black Sea straits under Russia's nose—but they had no intention of giving them up from the start. At the next peace congress, they would have traditionally "chatted it up"—Russia, as usual, would almost have been expected to stay. Most likely, there would now be a British military base in the straits, like in Gibraltar, from which the Spaniards will never expel the Brits.
                    1. +1
                      30 January 2026 10: 55
                      This whole topic has been chewed over and over a million times, even on this site, and you and I have completely opposite opinions. I don't want to repeat myself for the millionth time.

                      Oh, by the way, regarding the 1877-78 war, I forgot to mention that Russia's acquired territories were barely touched—only Bayazet was persuaded to return them. The Balkans were the first to be reshaped.
                      What I'm getting at is that even under those conditions, Russia was left alone. And after WWI, hardly anyone would have risked it.
                      1. +1
                        30 January 2026 13: 03
                        Quote: Trapper7
                        And after WWI, hardly anyone would have taken the risk.

                        just the facts-all The victors of WWI received some enemy territories
                    2. +2
                      30 January 2026 14: 40
                      In fact, the Russian Empire did not enter the war, but Germany declared war on it after the start of general mobilization due to the bombing of Belgrade by Austria-Hungary.
                    3. +3
                      30 January 2026 19: 35
                      Russia didn't enter World War I. Germany declared war on it. And Türkiye declared war on Russia, not the other way around. This is where the interest in the straits arose.
                      Don't confuse cause and effect.
                      Russia did not start the war because of the straits.
                      1. +1
                        30 January 2026 20: 26
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        And Türkiye declared war on Russia, and not the other way around.
                        Quite the opposite. On October 24, 1914, Naval Minister Djemal Pasha (who personally favored France and was opposed to Turkey's entry into the war on Germany's side) gave Admiral Souchon the fateful order to sail to the Black Sea for maneuvers. However, Enver Pasha (an ardent supporter of Turkey's entry into the war on Germany's side) handed Souchon a second secret set of orders, instructing the Ottoman fleet to attack Russian warships without declaring war. The admiral agreed to keep the envelope containing Enver's orders sealed until he received a radiogram instructing him to open it. However, as soon as the German ships, having changed their flag, entered the Black Sea on October 27, 1914, the Ottomans lost the initiative.
                        Although Admiral Souchon was appointed commander of the Ottoman fleet, he remained loyal to the German Kaiser. When Enver failed to transmit a radio message to Souchon, the German admiral took the initiative and on October 29 attacked Russian bases on the Crimean coast, sinking a gunboat and a minelayer. The Goeben also bombarded Sevastopol. The next day, upon learning of the incident, the Sultan sent a telegram of apologies to Nicholas II, promising to conduct an investigation, punish the perpetrators, and compensate for the damage. The Grand Vizier sent a similar telegram to Prime Minister Kokovtsev. However, Russian Foreign Minister Sazonov instructed the Russian ambassador to Turkey to leave the Ottoman Empire. Following this, Britain and France also recalled their ambassadors from Istanbul.
                        On November 2, 1914, Russia declared war on Turkey.
                        Britain declared war on Turkey on November 5, and France on November 6.
                      2. +3
                        30 January 2026 22: 12
                        Where do you get this nonsense?
                        In fact, the war with Turkey began on October 29, 1914, with an early morning attack by a detachment of Turkish ships on Sevastopol, Odessa, Feodosia, and Novorossiysk. They approached Odessa, Sevastopol, Feodosia, and Novorossiysk and fired on warships and port facilities, as well as urban structures. They also mined the Kerch Strait.
                        Two Turkish ships, the Yavuz Sultan Selim and the Midilli, manned by German crews and accompanied by two destroyers, took part in the attack on the Russian Black Sea cities and the Black Sea Fleet.
                        On the same day, the Turkish destroyers Gayret and Muavenet carried out a raid on the Odessa port.
                        The destroyer Gayret, approaching within half a cable's length of the gunboat Donets, moored at the outer western end of Odessa Harbor's breakwater, sank it with a torpedo. Then, firing 10-12 shells at the minelayer Beshtau, which, fearing detection, did not open fire, sank a coal barge with two shots, and left the harbor. Then, protected by the breakwater, it bombarded the port for a while, and after the gunboat Kubanets opened fire, it disappeared into the sea. The destroyer Muavenet fired at the gunboat Kubanets and, intending to torpedo it, accidentally collided with a harbor boat rushing to the aid of the sinking Donets.
                        On the same day, the Turkish auxiliary minelayer Samsun laid a minefield (28 mines) in front of Odessa on the way to Sevastopol.

                        October 29 (around 4 a.m.). The Turkish minelayer Nilufer laid a 60-min minefield on the approaches to Sevastopol. On the return voyage, the minelayer encountered and sank the steamship Velikiy Knyaz Alexander.
                        On the same day, the Turkish cruiser Hamidiye fired 150 shells at the Feodosia train station, port, and warehouses.
                        Having then sailed along the Crimean coast, the Hamidiye sank the steamship Shura and one sailing ship near Cape Meganom.
                        Thus, Russia was forced to declare war in response to this attack.
                        The Russo-Turkish War began in the same way as the Russo-Japanese War, with the Japanese attack on Port Arthur.
                        The decision to attack the Black Sea Fleet was made on August 21 (September 3) at a secret meeting of the Young Turk leadership with the Grand Vizier.
                        On September 14 (27), Turkey closed the Dardanelles to all ships of any flag. The strait was mined and blocked with nets, and the lighthouses were extinguished. The following day, a complete closure of shipping through the straits was announced.
                      3. 0
                        4 February 2026 14: 56
                        Dear "Silhouette" nickname. Two points. First, you absolutely shouldn't have been typing your text. Or maybe you weren't, you just copied it from somewhere. I know all this as well as you do, and possibly better. But the point isn't what happened. The point is whether these actions necessarily led us to declare war on Turkey or not. Look. We've been at de facto war with Ukraine since February 22, 2022. But... it's not a war. Because neither we nor Ukraine declared war on us. Or take Venezuela. The Americans shelled the country's capital (and not only) and kidnapped the President. Has Venezuela declared war on the United States?
                        The US also heavily pressured Iran last year. But Iran, too, did not declare war on the US.
                        From 1941 to 1944, the Japanese shelled our territory and sank our ships, and so what? The USSR tolerated it all and didn't declare war on Japan. And from 1944 onward, Japan itself began to treat the USSR with considerable respect.
                        What makes you think that?
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        Thus, Russia I had to was to declare war in response to this attack.
                        Who allegedly forced us? Was it Türkiye?
                        Second. If you don't know anything personally, it's foolish to dismiss everything you do know as nonsense. There are documents from those years published by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I'm attaching them. You can read them. Moreover, upon learning of the Ottoman navy's provocation against Russia, Grand Vizier Said Halim Pasha and four other Ottoman ministers announced their intention to resign. However, supporters of a military alliance with Germany managed to persuade the Grand Vizier to remain in his post.
                        Now about yours:
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        The decision to attack the Black Sea Fleet was made on August 21 (September 3) at a secret meeting of the Young Turk leadership with the Grand Vizier
                        Excuse me, but how do you know what was decided on August 21 (September 3) at the secret meeting of the Young Turk leadership with the Grand Vizier, if the meeting, as you yourself claim, was secret? lol
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        On September 14 (27), Türkiye closed the Dardanelles to passage for ships of any flag. The strait was mined and blocked with barrier nets, and the lighthouses were extinguished.
                        Yes. The only question is what Russia's involvement is. The fact is that after the Goeben and Breslau successfully broke through to Turkey, the British left a blockading squadron near the Bosphorus. And so, on September 14 (27), one (or more) of the British destroyers entered the Dardanelles and captured a Turkish naval vessel there (there are differing accounts of which vessel it was; some say it was a torpedo boat, but the fact remains). It was after this that the Turks undertook all the actions you describe.
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        The Russo-Turkish War began in the same way as the Russo-Japanese War, with the Japanese attack on Port Arthur.
                        In fact, Japan officially severed diplomatic relations with the Russian Empire on January 24, 1904. Although Japan never officially declared war on us, everyone understood that the severance of diplomatic relations was de facto war. Therefore, on the morning of January 26, Nicholas II held a meeting on the Japanese question. The Tsar briefly wrote in his diary: "It was decided not to start ourselves."This highly emotional decision led to tragic consequences. That evening, a grand court ball was held in the Winter Palace. And on the night of January 27, the Japanese fleet attacked our squadron, which was moored (despite Admiral Makarov's warnings about the danger of such a fleet deployment) in the outer roadstead of Port Arthur.
                        If there's something you still don't understand, it's better to just ask rather than copy entire pages from Wikipedia. hi
                      4. 0
                        8 February 2026 09: 22
                        Uv. Sergey Petrovich!
                        I can't judge your knowledge and understanding of history based on just one post.
                        I will limit myself to a diagnosis according to the old navigator’s rule: what I see is what I write.
                        All I see is cognitive dissonance in your reasoning.
                        Quote: Seal
                        Look. We've been at de facto war with Ukraine since February 22, 2022. But... it's not a war. Because neither we nor Ukraine have declared war on us. Or take Venezuela. The Americans shelled the country's capital (and elsewhere) and kidnapped the President. Has Venezuela declared war on the United States?
                        The US also heavily pressured Iran last year. But Iran, too, did not declare war on the US.
                        From 1941 to 1944, the Japanese shelled our territory and sank our ships, and so what? The USSR tolerated it all and didn't declare war on Japan. And from 1944 onward, Japan itself began to treat the USSR with considerable respect.

                        You've mixed up different facts and created a hodgepodge. You can't compare carrots and sausages the way you're doing. In logic, this is called the law of identity. Only similar concepts can be compared.
                        And you have a vinaigrette in your head.
                        By your logic, if war isn't officially declared, it doesn't exist. That is, if no one has thrown a gauntlet in your face, penned a memorandum or manifesto published in a newspaper, or staged a dance with tambourines, then there's no war. No procedure, no war.
                        You're a formalist. That's all.
                        Or you live by outdated concepts.
                        I'll let you in on a secret: war can be waged without any procedures. Which is exactly what's being done now.
                        I could explain to you each case you cited why war was not declared, but this is a topic for a separate conversation for each case, and not for a general discussion.
                        Quote: Seal
                        Who allegedly forced us? Was it Türkiye?

                        No, Martians. Or voodoo sorcerers.
                        Quote: Seal
                        Moreover, upon learning of the Ottoman navy's provocation against Russia, Grand Vizier Said Halim Pasha and four other Ottoman ministers announced their intention to resign. However, supporters of a military alliance with Germany managed to persuade the Grand Vizier to remain in his post.

                        So what?...What does this prove?
                        Only that these guys considered such an attack premature, that the country was not yet completely ready for war with Russia and still needed to prepare well.
                        Therefore, Russia made the right decision to strike Turkey, which was not yet prepared for war.
                        Quote: Seal
                        Excuse me, but how do you know what was decided on August 21 (September 3) at the secret meeting of the Young Turk leadership with the Grand Vizier, if the meeting, as you yourself claim, was secret?

                        From post-war memoirs and interviews.
                        Quote: Seal
                        Yes. The only question is what Russia's role is in this.

                        The most direct.
                        Turkey cut off Russia's maritime trade through the straits and communications with its allies, and did in the Black Sea what Germany had done in the Baltic. It committed hostile acts against Russia, effectively becoming Germany's ally.
                        As for the war with Ukraine, I dare say that an operation is defined as an action limited in time, scale, and scope. And what Putin said on the morning of February 24th four years ago doesn't fit that definition at all.
                        This is war.
                      5. 0
                        8 February 2026 17: 36
                        Dear "Silhouette" nickname. I won't repeat myself, I'll just limit myself to a few comments. This is your answer to this
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        I will limit myself to a diagnosis according to the old navigator’s rule: what I see is what I write.
                        You have several controversial points here.
                        Firstly, this principle, even if you truly possessed the ability to see backwards, that is, to see what happened more than 100 years ago, is more like the principle of a Chukchi sledder: "What I see, I sing about." The Chukchi can sing about anything they see. Even if they thought they saw the Spirit of the Tundra, they will sing about the Spirit of the Tundra. And if they saw the Lord of the Upper World, they will sing about him. Watch officers record only the most important events that actually occurred in the ship's log. Otherwise, if the navigators followed (God forbid) your "rule," the ship's logs would resemble multi-page science fiction novels.
                        But you (I hope) won’t claim that you can see what happened more than a hundred years ago?
                        Although, judging by this of yours
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        Only that these guys considered such an attack premature, that the country was not yet completely ready for war with Russia and still needed to prepare well.
                        I'm not sure you'll answer no.
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        All I see is cognitive dissonance in your reasoning.
                        Well, if you're hinting that you can see centuries into the past, then I'm not surprised that you can claim to see things in the present day. lol
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        From post-war memoirs and interviews.
                        So, what stopped you from citing at least one of your "sources" as an example? Were you embarrassed? Or do you understand that it's better not to, as it will only evoke laughter?
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        The most direct.
                        The question wasn't about the consequences of Turkey's closure of the straits for us, but about Russia's role in Turkey's closure of the straits. You pretended not to understand. Just as you understood what the documents I cited said. For some reason, you didn't want happiness for yourself.
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        But what Putin said on the morning of February 24th four years ago doesn't fit that definition at all. It's war.
                        Is what Vladimir Vladimirovich said two months ago, in December 2025, still relevant? Then I'll show you what he said.
                        Russian President Vladimir Putin called Russia's actions in Ukraine "surgical" and expressed confidence that the special operation is not "a war in the literal sense of the word." He made this statement while answering journalists' questions at the VTB investment forum "Russia Calling!"
                        At the same time, the head of state emphasized that the situation would be different if Europe attacked Russia. "If Europe suddenly starts a war with us, I think it would happen very quickly. This isn't Ukraine. With Ukraine, we're acting surgically, carefully. This isn't war in the direct, modern sense of the word," the Russian leader said.

                        And one more thing. Türkiye declared war on us only on November 11, 1914.
                      6. 0
                        8 February 2026 18: 17
                        Dear Sergei Petrovich! Your reasoning amused me greatly. It's a shame it was so far removed from the essence of my arguments.
                        I know very well what Putin said about the war in Ukraine. I know even better what he didn't say – that it's a civil war. And I understand him.
                        And you, alas! - no. What a pity.
                        You'll understand later. When everyone's talking about it.
                      7. 0
                        8 February 2026 22: 52
                        Dear "Silhouette" nickname. Your reasoning has greatly amused me. It's a shame you haven't even come close to the crux of my arguments.
                        And with this one of yours
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        I know very well what Putin said about the war in Ukraine. I know even better what he didn't say – that it's a civil war. And I understand him.
                        - You've made a mess of things once again.
                        For Vladimir Vladimirovich, at a press conference on December 14, 2023, gave the following definition of the events in Ukraine.
                        "And what is happening now [in Ukraine] is a huge tragedy, similar to a civil war, when brothers found themselves on opposite sides. The problem is that I've always said—and even now, despite the tragedy of current events—that, at their core, Russians and Ukrainians are one people."
                        And after this you still claim that it is you who supposedly understand Vladimir Vladimirovich? laughing Oh well !!!! negative
                      8. 0
                        8 February 2026 19: 09
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        Türkiye has blocked Russia's maritime trade through the straits and communications with its allies.
                        With the allies? Yeah, those "allies" were something else. Especially Britain. I've been thinking about Britain's role in Turkey's entry into World War I on Germany's side. I might post an article while I'm thinking about it.
                      9. 0
                        8 February 2026 19: 45
                        Yes. Go ahead, tell us how the treacherous Brits forced the Turks to recruit Germans, and how they forced them to command the Turkish squadron. How they put German crews on Turkish destroyers and sent them to attack the Black Sea Fleet. The Germans even paid them a fortune for it. And the Turks then tried to apologize for a long time, claiming they had nothing to do with it.
                        It will be very interesting.
                      10. 0
                        8 February 2026 23: 05
                        I'll tell you, I'll tell you. And in the meantime, I'll show people your latest fantasies. These ones.
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        How German crews were placed on Turkish destroyers and sent to attack the Black Sea Fleet.

                        In fact, there were no German crews on these destroyers. And where would the Germans have found available destroyer crews in Turkey?
                        However, due to the fact that both of these destroyers were of German construction:
                        Muâvenet-i Millîye (former S-165) Schichau-Werft. Construction began 1908. Launched on 20 March 1909. Commissioned on 17 August 1910. Sold to Turkey in 1910 and renamed Muavenet-i-Milleye.
                        "Gayret-i Vatanye" (former S-168) F. Schichau Elbing, yard number 8221908. Laid down 1908. Launched 30.09.1909. Transferred to Turkey as "Gayret-i-Vatanye" 17.08.1910
                        Then Admiral Souchon, having reasonable doubts about the qualifications of Turkish mechanics, took several mechanics from the cruisers and sent them to Turkish destroyers as a precaution. That's all.
                        I have a question, dear nickname "Silhouette", what did the Turks do to you that you are so actively writing such easily verifiable fabrications?
                      11. 0
                        9 February 2026 06: 34
                        Quote: Seal
                        I have a question, dear nickname "Silhouette", what did the Turks do to you that you are so actively writing such easily verifiable fabrications?

                        I can't forgive them for Hagia Sophia.
                      12. 0
                        9 February 2026 09: 13
                        Quote: Silhouette
                        I can't forgive them for Hagia Sophia.
                        Hmm, and how does this, generally speaking, “worthy” reason make you fantasize so actively?
                        By the way, what's up with this thing of yours?
                        From post-war memoirs and interviews.
                        What, you still can’t bring yourself to share from whose memoirs and interviews you took this imperative statement of yours?
                        The decision to attack the Black Sea Fleet was made on August 21 (September 3) at a secret meeting of the Young Turk leadership with the Grand Vizier.
                      13. 0
                        8 February 2026 09: 37
                        The copies of telegrams and reports you provided refute your own reasoning. Read them carefully, not superficially, and you'll be happy.
                2. +2
                  30 January 2026 16: 26
                  Quote: vet
                  And who always got in the way? For example, at the Berlin Congress of 1878?

                  The Germans you constantly suggest being friends with?)))
                  In fact, it's highly likely that no one would object. Erzurum, you know, is not the Bosphorus.
            3. +1
              30 January 2026 11: 19
              Quote: vet
              But Kars and Erzurum were not taken away, but rather returned.

              By this logic, Bender, Ackerman, and Azov should also be returned to the Turks.
              1. +4
                30 January 2026 11: 27
                Azov was located in territory that had long been universally recognized as Russian. Erzurum, according to international law, was a Turkish city temporarily occupied by Russian troops. The question of its future ownership was to be resolved in peace negotiations. And it was not a given that Russia would have been able to retain it. Russia had repeatedly ended wars with Turkey by returning part of the occupied territory.
            4. +2
              30 January 2026 13: 35
              Kars and Erzurum, cities of Western Armenia, became Turkish after the Armenian Genocide, the first of the 20th century. In this sense, Lenin and Atatürk were kindred spirits.
          2. +3
            30 January 2026 10: 38
            Quote: Olgovich
            Why did they forget and take Kars, Erzurum, etc. from Russia?
            Which Russia had taken from Turkey not long before, right?
            Quote: Olgovich
            kept a huge army on our border during the Great Patriotic War,
            Excuse me, but if you were Ismet Inönü, where would you have stationed the Turkish army in 1941 and 1942? For example, when the steamroller of the German offensive rolled into the Balkans in the spring of 1941, Turkey began to strengthen its army and kept it exclusively in the Istanbul region, in Turkish Thrace, and on the Turkish Aegean coast.
            When the USSR invaded Iran in late August 1941 and began openly supporting Kurdish leaders, İsmet İnönü transferred some of the Turkish army to the Iranian border. When the German offensive steamrolled into the Caucasus in the summer of 1942 and had already reached the passes, İsmet İnönü ordered a significant portion of the Turkish army, by then even larger, to be concentrated on the Soviet border. After all, no one could guarantee that Soviet troops would be able to hold the Caucasus, the Black Sea coast, and Transcaucasia. General Felmy's corps, composed of Germans fluent in Farsi, Arabic, and Turkish, marched in the second echelon of Kleist's armies, but did not participate in the fighting. Its mission was to advance through Iran and Turkey to Palestine and strike the British from the rear.
            Where would you, if you were Inonu, keep your army?
            Quote: Olgovich
            US missiles were deployed to attack the USSR
            In fact, the USSR initially made territorial claims against Turkey. Two factors prevented Joseph Vissarionovich from resolving the issue by force:
            1. The need to fulfill our obligations and take part in the war against Japan. But a simultaneous war with Turkey was neither necessary nor advisable, etc., etc., etc.
            2. The emergence of nuclear weapons in the United States.

            But after Japan's capitulation, the US and Britain immediately provided their guarantees to Turkey. This freed Turkey from the obligation to cede a significant portion of Soviet territory, something Turkey had already begun to agree to under previous circumstances. Yes, after Turkey (and Greece at the same time) joined NATO, the US deployed missiles on Turkish territory. But the US didn't ask the Turks for permission, as it wasn't necessary. The US even deployed nuclear weapons on Turkish territory.
            The Cuban Missile Crisis began without any connection to Turkey. It was only later, to save face for Khrushchev, that the US itself proposed withdrawing its Jupiter missiles from Turkey. But they retained them in Denmark, Norway, and Iran. It was more convenient to strike the Baku oil fields from Iran, and Leningrad and Moscow from Denmark.
            The distance from Bornholm to Moscow is 1388 km, and from the closest point in Turkey to Moscow is 1514 km.
            1. +1
              30 January 2026 11: 44
              Quote: Seal
              Which Russia had taken from Turkey not long before, right?

              Kars?! belay Then Azov, Izmail, Ackerman, Bender, etc., etc. had to be returned.
              Quote: Seal
              Actually, the USSR first made territorial claims against Turkey.

              In fact, the USSR demanded only ITS OWN, which was taken by force by the Turks in 1921
              Quote: Seal
              But the US did not ask the Turks for permission to do this, since it was not necessary.

              belay lol
              Quote: Seal
              The Cuban Missile Crisis began without any connection to Turkey. It was only later, to save face for Khrushchev, that the US itself proposed withdrawing its Jupiter missiles from Turkish territory.

              The alternative has begun.. lol US missile deployment1961 g, Caribbean crisis-October 1962
              Quote: Seal
              The distance from Bornholm to Moscow is 1388 km, and from the closest point in Turkey to Moscow is 1514 km.

              The USSR is not only Moscow.
              If you still take an interest in the map, you will see that from Turkey to Crimea, Odessa, etc. is 600-800 km
              1. +2
                30 January 2026 12: 46
                Quote: Olgovich
                Kars?! Then Azov, Izmail, Ackerman, Bender, etc., etc., also needed to be returned.
                In fact, the discussion was about what was taken from Turkey during the last war of 1787-1788.
                This is what you wrote.
                Quote: Olgovich
                Why did they forget and take Kars, Erzurum, etc. from Russia?

                And now you want to spread this demand of yours deep into history? Under the pretext of what you wrote. "etc." ? laughing laughing
                Quote: Olgovich
                In fact, the USSR demanded only ITS OWN, which was taken by force by the Turks in 1921
                Actually, not the Turks, but the Germans. It was the Germans who defeated us by force, not the Turks. On the Turkish front, we spent the entire First World War winning. But, alas, we essentially lost to the Germans. Albeit due to our own internal problems. But these internal problems were caused by the protracted war. A war primarily with the Germans and secondarily with the Austrians. And the Germans at Brest-Litovsk set conditions for us that took into account the interests of all their allies. Only Bulgaria got nothing from us.
                Quote: Olgovich
                Let's go... lol US missile deployment in 1961, Caribbean crisis in October 1962
                What, did you eat something stale this morning? What does alternative have to do with it?
                In April 1961, with the participation of the US government, Cuban Contras carried out the Bay of Pigs invasion (also known as the Bay of Pigs Operation or Operation Zapata) to overthrow Fidel Castro's government in Cuba. Following this, Fidel requested additional assistance.
                Almost immediately, after a short period of time, namely in the spring of 1962, Soviet intelligence received copies of the plan for a nuclear strike on the USSR and a list of cities that would become targets for American missiles.
                Another source said that A strike on Cuba is scheduled for the fall of 1962. This could not help but worry the Soviet leadership: the American nuclear arsenal far exceeded the Soviet Union's capabilities. The number of nuclear weapons in the United States exceeded that of the USSR by 10-12 times.
                It is the combination of these three factors, once again
                1. Fidel's request for increased aid after the defeat of the Cuban Contras in the Bay of Pigs.
                2. In the spring of 1962, Soviet intelligence received copies of the plan for a nuclear strike on the USSR and a list of cities that would become targets for American missiles.
                3. The subsequent receipt by the USSR of information that a strike on Cuba was scheduled for the autumn of 1962.
                And they led to Khrushchev’s decision to deploy our missiles in Cuba.
                The fact that the US had previously deployed its missiles in Izmir was merely an official pretext.
                The USSR is not only Moscow.
                If you still take an interest in the map, you will see that from Turkey to Crimea, Odessa, etc. is 600-800 km
                Of course. But if you look into it, you'll see that
                1) From Norway to Murmansk is a stone's throw, to Arkhangelsk less than 700 km.
                2. From Denmark (Bornholm Island) to Kaliningrad - 355 km, to Vilnius - 657 km, to Riga - 603 km, to Tallinn - 748 km, to Leningrad - 1055 km.
                3. From Greece to Odessa is less than 700 km.
                4. Iran. From Tabriz to Baku and Tbilisi it's approximately 400 km each, and to Yerevan 260 km. Ashgabat, the border with Iran, is just a stone's throw away.
                5. From Seoul to Vladivostok is 723 km.,
                6. From Hokkaido to Vladivostok - 660 km.
                That's it.
                1. -1
                  30 January 2026 13: 21
                  Quote: Seal
                  In fact, the discussion was about what was taken from Turkey during the last war of 1787-1788.

                  belay
                  You wrote this:
                  Quote: Seal
                  Which Russia had taken from Turkey not long before, right?

                  Erzurum - recently, and Kars a long time ago - the vet was talking about them.
                  Quote: Seal
                  And now you want to extend this demand of yours deep into history?

                  You want - if Kars was returned, then why not Izmaio?
                  Quote: Seal
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  In fact, the USSR demanded only ITS OWN, which was taken by force by the Turks in 1921
                  Actually, not by the Turks, but by the Germans. It was the Germans who defeated us by force, not the Turks.

                  Actually, read the captions under the Brest betrayal - Türkiye is there.
                  Quote: Seal
                  But unfortunately, we essentially lost to the Germans.

                  The Bolsheviks lost. This isn't Russia. Read the Treaty of Versailles, where Russia was entitled to everything the other victors were entitled to.
                  Quote: Seal
                  What, did you eat something stale this morning?

                  belay Keep your problems to yourself.
                  Quote: Seal
                  The fact that the US had previously deployed its missiles in Izmir was merely an official pretext.

                  This is a fact, not your invention.
                  Quote: Seal
                  1) from Norway to Murmansk you can say "by hand p"

                  We finally got to the map.
                  Well, fine Yes
              2. +2
                30 January 2026 12: 55
                What's so funny about this? Let me remind you that Turkey was in February 1952. And ever since, as a NATO member, Turkey has been obligated to make its territory available for NATO bases. And NATO command can deploy whatever it wants to those bases. Even nuclear weapons.
                Did this make you laugh?
              3. +1
                30 January 2026 15: 43
                Quote: Olgovich
                You will see that from Turkey to Crimea

                From the Crimean Foros to the Turkish coast there are exactly 263 kilometers.
          3. +3
            30 January 2026 15: 23
            Nobody took it. Lenin gave it away. Completely voluntarily. Like, we're not imperialists.
          4. +3
            30 January 2026 19: 20
            Quote: Olgovich
            Why did they forget and take Kars, Erzurum, etc. from Russia?

            Türkiye didn't take the Caucasus territories from Russia. They were taken from independent national disunities that, in their short existence, managed to wage war against each other and their neighbors.
            When Bolshevik Russia returned to Armenia, the Armenians had already capitulated to Turkey and ceded much more territory. And after such "successes" by the Transcaucasian nationalists, the Bolsheviks were faced with a choice: either the Turks return Batumi or Kars.
            1. 0
              31 January 2026 09: 36
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Türkiye did not take the Caucasian territories from Russia.

              Brest 1918 was signed by not...more Russia? belay
              According to it, the Kars, Ardahan and Batumi regions were transferred to the Ottoman Empire.
      2. +5
        30 January 2026 06: 19
        Quote: not the one
        Nestor Makhno, who fought four times on the side of the Bolsheviks, was awarded the Order of the Red Banner


        This is a fiction that appeared in the 90s.
  2. +3
    30 January 2026 05: 40
    Anarchy is the mother of order! smile Makhno is quite a piece of work.
  3. +2
    30 January 2026 05: 59
    Thank you, Valery!

    There were colorful figures during the Time of Troubles.

    Only if the False Dmitrys imitated royal origins, in the 20th century this was no longer required.

    And the laws are general:
    But you loved your childhood -
    Through the forests of deep monasteries, log cabins,
    On the steppes of nomadic without roads,
    Free expanses and chains,
    Pretenders, thieves and cut them off,
    The nightingale's whistle and the prison


    Leva Zadov alone is worth something.
  4. +3
    30 January 2026 06: 42
    In total, according to Makhno's chief of staff, V. Belash, the old man still had about three and a half thousand cavalrymen, up to five thousand infantrymen, 16 guns, and 500 machine guns. But now the decision was made to finally liquidate the intractable old man's anarchist republic.


    500 machine guns for 8,5 soldiers. I can tell you that very forcefully.
    1. +2
      30 January 2026 15: 26
      So they mowed down the Whites from their carts. No one in the steppe could resist this shower of lead.
  5. +1
    30 January 2026 06: 57
    Valery hi As always, a good article. Thank you.
  6. +5
    30 January 2026 08: 28
    Two ships of the Black Sea Fleet were transferred: "Zhivoy" and "Zhutkiy".

    And you can read more?
    For some reason, I thought that the "Zhivoy" sank back in 1920, and that the engines on the "Zhutkiy" were destroyed.
    Let us note once again: it was vital for Soviet Russia to close the Black Sea straits to Entente warships, and therefore this alliance was mutually beneficial.

    At that moment, perhaps yes. Later... probably too. Turks and Greeks, it's all the same, even though the Greeks are Orthodox.
    The Turks maintained their gratitude to the USSR even after the death of Kemal Ataturk – unlike the Bulgarians and Romanians

    Gratitude has nothing to do with it. There is no such concept in international politics.
    The Turks simply had the opportunity to remain on the sidelines, and they took it. However, German ships were allowed to pass through the Bosphorus quietly. And if the Wehrmacht had prevailed, Inönü would most likely have immediately abandoned his neutrality.
  7. +3
    30 January 2026 08: 29
    Thank you so much for the series of articles about Frunze. It was very interesting to read!
  8. +2
    30 January 2026 08: 55
    If the Turks had lost, the British would have seized at least Crimea and the Caucasus.
    1. +4
      30 January 2026 09: 11
      Quote: Melior
      If the Turks had lost

      The Turks helped bring order to the Caucasus, reached a fraternal agreement with Azerbaijan not to resist the establishment of Soviet power, and reached a military agreement with Armenia, meaning they simply took two-thirds of their territory and left the rest to us.
      The Greeks were quickly dealt with, with a massacre occurring along the way, and the British fled.
      This is how a successful agreement between Turkish nationalists and Russian communists turned out.
      1. +2
        30 January 2026 09: 24
        The Greeks, however, aren't quite so clear-cut: they themselves had previously massacred the Turks in the territories they occupied. And then they wondered, "Why us?"
        Georgians, by the way, should be grateful to the Soviet authorities for reaching an agreement with the Turks regarding the return of Batumi. And Azerbaijanis should be grateful for the fact that the Turks, in accordance with the agreement with the USSR, agreed to withdraw from Nakhichevan.
        1. +5
          30 January 2026 09: 58
          Quote: vet
          Regarding the Greeks, however, the situation is not so clear: they themselves had previously carried out a massacre of the Turks in the territories they occupied.

          Everything would be fine, but the Young Turks began the massacre of the Pontic Greeks back in 1914, and the Kemalists merely continued it.

          and that's not counting the previous five hundred years.
          1. +1
            30 January 2026 10: 27
            Well, for 500 years, they oppressed everyone. They oppressed the pirate Barbarossa so much that they appointed him commander-in-chief of their own fleet. And his brother, emir of Algiers. And they oppressed the Phanariots of Constantinople, appointing them as high-ranking officials and, traditionally, governors of Moldavia and Wallachia. Cantacuzene was punished by giving him a monopoly on trade with Muscovy, Alexander Carathéodory by appointing him their representative at the Berlin Congress of 1878, Mouzouris was tormented by appointments as governor of Samos and ambassador to Great Britain. And the banker Zografos was forced to accept awards from three sultans. All sorts of things happened over the course of 500 years. And there were periods when Christians fled or migrated en masse to the territory of the Ottoman Empire - because life there was better and more peaceful than in the territories of the European kings - pay the jizya and live peacefully, they wouldn’t even draft you into the army.
            1. -1
              30 January 2026 15: 27
              Half of the viziers there were Europeans.
              The Turks would never have built an empire if they hadn't been able to establish internationalism. And all sorts of Arabs hate them because the Turks simply slaughtered their nationalists and didn't allow smaller nations to slaughter each other.
            2. +1
              30 January 2026 16: 33
              How lovely...
              Quote: vet
              And there were periods

              I take it you are not aware that those times are long gone?
              Google "genocide of the Pontic Greeks"
              1. -1
                30 January 2026 16: 54
                those times are long gone

                We are talking about the period you stated:
                not counting the previous five hundred years
                1. 0
                  1 February 2026 08: 16
                  Quote: vet
                  We are talking about the period you stated:

                  Once again you have missed a great opportunity to remain silent.
                  Quote: vet
                  The pirate Barbarossa was so oppressed

                  Even someone as ignorant as you should know that Hayreddin wasn't a Christian. And at best, he was Greek only through his mother.
                  Cantacuzene was punished by being given a monopoly on trade with Muscovy.

                  And then they confiscated all his belongings and hanged him a little.
                  His son was also executed.
                  Quote: vet
                  Alexandra Carathéodory - by appointing him as his representative at the Berlin Congress of 1878

                  Do you even remember what started the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78?
                  1860: Massacre of Christians in Lebanon. More than 10 dead.
                  1866-69. Uprising in Crete.
                  1875 uprising in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
                  1876 ​​uprising in Bulgaria.
                  And everywhere the Turks act with incredible cruelty.
                  But in 1878, a Greek is sent on a diplomatic mission and, from your point of view, this immediately nullifies all the previous atrocities!
                  Don't you feel sick of your own hypocrisy?
        2. +5
          30 January 2026 10: 29
          Quote: vet
          Regarding the Greeks, however, it is not so clear-cut.

          The Greeks, centuries-old brothers in faith, bet on the English and lost.
          The Turks, centuries-old and sworn enemies, bet on us and won.
          Mysterious are the ways...
          1. +5
            30 January 2026 11: 36
            Quote: bober1982
            The Greeks, centuries-old brothers in faith, bet on the English and lost.

            also took part in the intervention in Odessa... hi
            1. +2
              30 January 2026 11: 44
              Quote: Sergey_Yekat
              also took part in the intervention in Odessa...

              Apparently, as a victorious country in the First World War, they rushed to join the Entente in time.
              For such and similar victors our people tore themselves to pieces and shed blood.
              1. +1
                30 January 2026 11: 54
                Quote: bober1982
                For such and similar victors our people tore themselves to pieces and shed blood.

                I don't quite agree - both the Russian Empire and the USSR had their own interests in these wars... another thing is that it was necessary not to create new states, but only provinces... hi
          2. +1
            30 January 2026 13: 16
            Quote: bober1982
            The Greeks are centuries-old brothers in faith
            These centuries-old brothers in faith caused a schism in Rus'.
            In the mid-17th century, Greek hierarchs on Mount Athos rejected Russian and Serbian liturgical books and even burned them as heretical. Some Russians doubted that Orthodoxy could survive under the Turks and sometimes sent their Greek guests (mostly monks and church dignitaries) to the Solovetsky Monastery on the White Sea or to Siberia in order to "return" them to Orthodoxy. On occasion, Russian priests in Moscow forbade Greek laypeople (mostly merchants) from attending Russian churches, considering them infidels. Furthermore, individuals who identified themselves as Greeks (as well as Serbs, Vlachs, and Bulgarians) and requested permission to settle in Russia were regularly interrogated about their faith, their baptismal rites, their religious practices, and their connections with non-Orthodox peoples. In cases where the Russian authorities (both ecclesiastical and secular) were dissatisfied with the results of their screening of these potential immigrants, they and their faith were subjected to what one historian called "purification" (which took various forms, from rebaptism or chrismation to exile to monasteries and churches, where they were required to spend a period of time under supervision). Sometimes this practice was extended to Greek clergy wishing to remain in Russia.
            In the 1650s, the Arab Patriarch Macarius of Antioch arrived in Russia seeking alms. His son and archdeacon, Paul of Aleppo, left a description of his travels. In connection with the presentation of icons to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich by several hierarchs of the Russian Church, Paul describes the attitude of the Moldavians, Vlachs, and Russians toward the Greeks. According to Paul, the Russians expected all Orthodox Christians to meticulously observe Russian liturgical and prayer practices. Otherwise, the newcomers risked being exiled to a land of eternal darkness. Paul added: "Seeing that the Greek monks who came to them were committing shameless, vile, and atrocious acts, getting drunk, drawing swords on one another to kill... they [the Russians], after having previously trusted them completely, began to send them into exile, banishing them to that land of darkness, and in particular, putting them to death for smoking tobacco." And the Greeks, in Paul's opinion, fully deserved to be treated in precisely this way.
            Avvakum in one of his letters to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich admonishes the Tsar: “You, Mikhailovich, Russian, not Greek! Speak in your natural language; do not disparage it either in church or at home... God loves us no less than the Greeks; He gave us the knowledge of our language through Saint Cyril and his brothers."
            1. +1
              30 January 2026 13: 41
              Quote: Seal
              These centuries-old brothers in faith

              You don't choose your brothers, no matter what they are, even if they are no good.
              The Greek Church (Helladic) occupies the honorable 11th place in the Orthodox diptych, and the Russian Church occupies the no less honorable 5th place.
              1. +2
                30 January 2026 13: 53
                The point is that our ancestors in the 16th and 17th centuries considered the Greeks to be infidels. Even when Nikon, seduced by the Greeks, began introducing Greek rules and reforming the Russian Church in line with the Greek practices of the time, the Russian ruling elite still remained suspicious of the Greeks and their motives and remained wary. In other words, because our ancestors believed that only their Orthodoxy remained untainted, they saw themselves as the only true Orthodox, not members of any commonwealth. Orthodoxy in this case served not as a connecting link, but as a dividing one; it created a distinction between the pure Russian and the corrupted Greek faith. It was precisely this element that the Old Believers subsequently adopted.
          3. +3
            30 January 2026 15: 30
            I don't recall any brothers like that. No, when money is needed, everyone is a brother.
          4. +3
            1 February 2026 14: 13
            Quote: bober1982
            The Turks, centuries-old and sworn enemies, bet on us and won.

            In the 20th century, Turkey transformed from an empire into a nation-state. While Russia and Turkey had previously clashed regularly in all wars, it later became clear that Bulgaria, liberated by the Turks, was more hostile to Russia than Turkey, with which Russia had fought from the time of Ivan the Terrible until World War I.
      2. -5
        30 January 2026 11: 54
        Quote: bober1982
        This is how a successful agreement between Turkish nationalists and Russian communists turned out.

        Yeah, for the Turks—the Turks took away from the communists the huge Kars region, 2/3 of the Batumi and Yerevan regions—in gratitude for their help...
        1. +2
          30 January 2026 12: 04
          In response to Turkish actions, socialist power was declared in Georgia.
          The restless southern Transcaucasian flank has been secured.
          Not so little.
          1. -5
            30 January 2026 12: 20
            Quote: bober1982
            Not so little

            That's what I'm saying - the Turks took a lot of territory from the communists.
        2. +2
          30 January 2026 13: 03
          Quote: Olgovich
          Yeah, for the Turks—the Turks took away from the communists the huge Kars region, 2/3 of the Batumi and Yerevan regions—in gratitude for their help...
          Not in gratitude for assistance. And not by the government of Mustafa Kemal. The territories you mentioned were ceded to the Ottoman Empire by the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.
          Incidentally, after the signing of the Treaty of Adrianople by representatives of the Government of the First Republic of Armenia, Armenia was reduced to a mere husk (and even then, cut off). The Bolsheviks, at the conclusion of the Treaty of Moscow in 1921, managed to persuade the Turkish side to abandon the Treaty of Adrianople and significantly increase Armenia's territory. Mustafa Kemal's government also agreed to hand over Batumi to us.
          1. -2
            30 January 2026 13: 55
            Quote: Seal
            Not in gratitude for assistance. And not by the government of Mustafa Kemal.

            ah, those were other Turks, "ungrateful"

            And the "grateful" Turks of Kemal and didn't think about returning Russian territories 1913 for the salvation of Turkey.

            "The noble Bolsheviks considered it inconvenient to remind the grateful noble Turks of such a "trifle-

            Only Stalin demanded them back in 45
            1. +3
              30 January 2026 14: 07
              we read.
              1)
              Quote: Olgovich
              "The noble ones the Bolsheviks found it inconvenient to remind grateful noble Turks about such a "trifle-

              2)
              Quote: Olgovich
              only Stalin demanded them back in 45

              Conclusion: do you really think that I.V. Stalin is not a Bolshevik? recourse
              By the way, it was a mistake to demand it. He got nothing and only damaged relations with Turkey. And thereby created the preconditions for the Cuban Missile Crisis, right?
              I wonder what's got you so fixated on Kars Governorate? After all, as a result of the Brest-Litovsk Treaty, we gave up millions of square kilometers of territory. And we didn't get it all back. Plus, we gave up Finland. But for some reason, you're fixated on the idea that the ungrateful Turks didn't give us "Kars Volost." laughing laughing laughing
              Or perhaps they didn't give it up because 40 years is a very short period of time, and the Turks continued to consider the "Kars Volost" their ancestral territory? Which, by the way, they'd had since 1918.
              1. -2
                30 January 2026 14: 25
                Quote: Seal
                Conclusion: do you really think that I.V. Stalin is not a Bolshevik?

                Such things can be known - in 45 Stalin was officially the head of the USSR
                Quote: Seal
                After all, as a result of the Brest Peace Treaty, we gave up Millions of square kilometers of territory

                1. And you don't know this - less than a million km2
                Article 2 about "victories" and "achievements" in Turkey.
                Quote: Seal
                consider "Karska volost" as your original territory?

                and Ackerman and Bender and Azov and other "primordial" tour territories lol
                1. +2
                  30 January 2026 16: 58
                  Hmm, you clearly ate something stale. That's what this is all about:
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  Such things can be known - in 45 Stalin was officially the head of the USSR
                  Does anyone argue with that? Who? Where did you see anyone objecting to the fact that I.V. Stalin was officially the head of the USSR in 1945? Although, if you look closely, the head of the USSR was, in fact, M.I. Kalinin.
                  But that's not the point. The point is this sequence of yours. I repeat.
                  The first
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  "The noble ones the Bolsheviks found it inconvenient remind the grateful noble Turks of such a "trifle-

                  Second.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  only Stalin demanded them back in 45

                  It follows from this that you do not consider I.V. Stalin a Bolshevik. Why?
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  and you don't know this - less than a million km2
                  I know. That's why I say it's more than a million square kilometers. Because historians, including people like you, always forget that territorial waters are also part of a state's territory. And yet, for some reason, no one ever takes them into account.
                  So, Article VI.
                  Russia undertakes to immediately conclude peace with the Ukrainian People's Republic and recognize the peace treaty between this state and the powers of the Quadruple Alliance. Ukrainian territory will be immediately cleared of Russian troops and the Russian Red Guard. Russia will cease all agitation or propaganda against the government or public institutions of the Ukrainian People's Republic.
                  Estonia and Livonia will also be immediately cleared of Russian troops and the Russian Red Guard. Estonia's eastern border runs generally along the Narva River. Livonia's eastern border runs generally through Lake Peipus and Lake Pskov to its southwestern corner, then through Lake Lubansk in the direction of Livenhof on the Western Dvina. Estonia and Livonia will be occupied by German police authorities until public safety is ensured by the country's own institutions and state order is established. Russia will immediately release all arrested or abducted residents of Estonia and Livonia and ensure the safe return of all abducted Estonians and Livonians.

                  Finland and the Åland Islands will also be immediately cleared of Russian troops and the Russian Red Guard, and Finnish ports of the Russian fleet and Russian naval forces.

                  That is, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk mentions:
                  Ukraine, Estonia and Livonia, Finland and the Åland Islands.
                  Article 4 states
                  The districts of Ardahan, Kars and Batum are also immediately cleared of Russian troops.

                  Not mentioned: Warsaw Governorate-General, Kovno Governorate and Vilnius Governorate.
                  Add up all these territories and add the territorial waters. Considering that the Åland Islands belonged to us.

                  But this is yours
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  and Ackerman and Bender and Azov and other "primordial" tour territories
                  - what is it for anyway? fool Or so as to seem to say something smart? request And did it turn out to be something like "there's elderberry in the garden, and an uncle in Kyiv?" lol
                  1. -3
                    31 January 2026 09: 55
                    Quote: Seal
                    Hmm, you clearly ate something stale.

                    . belay fool lol
                    Quote: Seal
                    Does anyone argue with this?

                    You. Stalin emerged as head of state in 45, and yet... a Bolshevik?

                    Stalin, Chairman of the State Defense Committee, what Kalinin?
                    Quote: Seal
                    I know. That's why I say it's more than a million square kilometers.

                    lol They didn't know the poet and wrote nonsense about MILLIONS of km2 - show us these millions lol waters.
                    Quote: Seal
                    What is the point of this?

                    to the fact that these were Turkish territories earlier - this can be known lol
        3. +5
          30 January 2026 16: 27
          Quote: Olgovich
          The Turks took away from the communists the huge Kars region, 2/3 of the Batumi and Erivan regions
          Not from the communists, but from the bourgeois nationalists of Georgia and Armenia. They (the Turks) later seized these border states themselves, but the communists came and demanded them back.
          1. -5
            31 January 2026 09: 57
            Quote: The Meaning of Life
            Not among the communists, but among the bourgeois nationalists of Georgia and Armenia

            Brest 1918 - finally read it.
            1. +1
              31 January 2026 18: 36
              The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed on March 3. On January 30, the Turks launched an offensive. By this point, the Russian army was virtually nonexistent, and the front was held by Georgian and Armenian volunteer corps. Credit must be given to the commander of the Caucasian Front, General M. A. Przhevalsky, who, despite the collapse of the Russian army, managed to form and arm national armies that at least somewhat held back the Turks. In February, the Transcaucasian Sejm declared itself the effective authority in Transcaucasia.
              1. -5
                1 February 2026 10: 22
                Quote: The Meaning of Life
                Brest was signed on March 3.

                still haven't read it....
    2. -1
      30 January 2026 09: 52
      Quote: Melior
      If the Turks had lost, the British would have seized at least Crimea and the Caucasus.

      Why would it suddenly?
      1. +5
        30 January 2026 11: 06
        Well, they've always had their eye on them! And now the Greeks and Armenians would have fallen under them, plus the White Army in Gallipoli.
        1. 0
          30 January 2026 16: 35
          The English have their eye on many things.
          But not everyone received it.
          1. +1
            30 January 2026 16: 52
            The English have their eye on many things.
            But not everyone received it.

            For example, half the world. But they wanted the whole world. Like in Warcraft:
            "We need peace. Preferably all of it."
      2. +2
        30 January 2026 16: 13
        Well, at least from the fact that English troops were already in Transcaucasia.
  9. -1
    30 January 2026 10: 01
    So, Crimea was liberated
    So, Crimea is occupied, and the number of victims of the massacre of Russians carried out by the occupiers is thousands of times higher than the number of victims of the German occupation of 1918.
    the so-called Ukrainian People's Republic (UNR), which was created by local nationalists led by Volodymyr Vynnychenko and Petliura on November 13 1918 years

    The author again doesn’t know the basics: the Ukrainian People’s Republic was created in November 1917 and not the so-called, but recognized by the Council of People's Commissars in December 1917.

    And the leaders of the UPR, the Nazis Vynnychenko and Grushevsky, etc., were an abomination...Invited by the Bolsheviks to destroy everything Russian in Ukraine

    At the same time, the problem of Nestor Makhno's anarchist republic was also resolved.

    The gullible Turk was deceived, just like all the Socialist Revolutionaries, anarchists, etc. who trusted the Bolsheviks.

    On October 14, 1922, this war ended with the complete victory of the Turkish Republic. In many ways, this The victory was achieved thanks to the financial and material assistance of our countryIn total, Turkey received aid highlighted 6,5 million rubles in gold

    Let me remind the author that at this time, 5 million Russian people died of the most severe famine due to cannibalism, and gold, instead of bread, went to support Russia's worst enemy, who had just killed our soldiers in WWI and slaughtered our citizens.
    1. -1
      30 January 2026 10: 08
      It is disgusting to read the anti-Soviet and Russophobic comments of a Moldovan who would be better off focusing on the problems of his own country – a former prosperous and wealthy republic of the USSR, now an unhappy and impoverished country that will soon cease to exist and whose president says that he would vote for joining Romania in a referendum.
      1. -2
        30 January 2026 10: 11
        By the way, the Ukrainian People's Republic you're writing about was liquidated in April 1918 by the Germans, Austrians, and their lackey Skoropadsky. Petliura and Vynnychenko created another Ukrainian People's Republic. They should have at least looked it up on Wikipedia before writing this nonsense.
      2. +1
        30 January 2026 11: 29
        Quote: vet
        It's disgusting to read anti-Soviet and Russophobic comments.

        I read it - see below, could you please enlighten me as to what constitutes Russophobia in this quote? hi
        And also - why do you mix Russophobia with anti-Sovietism? hi At the time in question, the Bolsheviks were Russophobes, and they didn’t even hide it... request
        Quote: Olgovich
        Let me remind the author that during this time, 5 million Russian people died from the most severe famine due to cannibalism, and gold, instead of bread, went to support Russia's worst enemy.

      3. -3
        30 January 2026 12: 17
        Quote: vet
        It's disgusting to read.

        I sympathize, Alexey
        Quote: vet
        unhappy and impoverished country

        Russophobes and created on the territory of Russia Have you already forgotten about the monoethnic states of the USSR and others from 1918 to 1940? And no one even... asked for the creation of the MSSR.
        Quote: vet
        created another UPR.

        lol they called it recovery created in 1917 UPR.
  10. +5
    30 January 2026 10: 05
    The author has covered Makhno's defeat very briefly; I would have liked more detail—which units participated, the villages, the stages of liquidation. For Frunze, this was no ordinary operation, nor for the front.

    There was material on Makhno, but it was written as if from the perspective of this “anarcho-Bolshevik,” without a detailed analysis of the Red Army’s operation to liquidate him.

    For example, cadets from various Red Army schools took part in the battles, including -
    The 5th Petrograd Soviet Infantry Courses, which on March 26, 1920 were transferred to Poltava and renamed the Poltava Soviet Infantry Command Courses; on June 29, 1920, the 29th Poltava Soviet Infantry Courses; and on March 19, 1921, the 14th Poltava Infantry School of Command Staff.

    Almost nothing is written about the cadets' battles against Wrangel and Makhno, but they were difficult and brutal.
    By the way, there were even mergers of different courses into regiments and a division...

    One of its first graduates, on September 1, 1922, was N.F. Vatutin, who received his graduation documents from the hands of M.V. Frunze, Deputy Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the Ukrainian SSR. Later, in July 1925, the school was transferred to Sumy and renamed the Sumy Infantry School. After M.V. Frunze's death in late 1925, at the request of the school's personnel, it was named after him. In July 1927, the Sumy Infantry School was reorganized into an artillery school, which in 1937 was renamed the M.V. Frunze Sumy Artillery School.

    M. V. Frunze highly praised the actions of the cadets on the Southern Front in his speech at a meeting of cadets, commanders and political workers of the Moscow garrison on February 16, 1925.

    "I remember the cadet brigade operating on the Southern Front... The work of this brigade is full of heroism. I hope that this tradition of our heroic combat cadets will be absorbed by you, and will become part of your very being—future commanders. This tradition is the key to future great feats that the cadets, commanders, and our entire Workers' and Peasants' Red Army will demonstrate to the world when the Workers' and Peasants' Fatherland calls us to it."

    By Order No. 2900 of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic dated December 31, 1920, the 29th Poltava Infantry Courses were reorganized as the 14th Poltava Infantry School, effective May 1, 1921, with a three-year training period. A. Ya. Kruze remained the school's headmaster, and N. A. Naidenov served as the commissar.
  11. +1
    30 January 2026 10: 07
    There's nothing unexpected about the sculpture of Voroshilov next to Ataturk. At the time of these Turkish events, Voroshilov held the post of commander of the North Caucasus Military District. Budyonny, by the way, was his deputy. They handled all military-political issues and contacts with the Turks, preparing strategic decisions. Aralov carried out secret contacts, a role the Turks also appreciated.
  12. +4
    30 January 2026 10: 59
    Two ships of the Black Sea Fleet, the Zhivoy and the Zhutkiy, were handed over.
    "Ships" is a strong word. Many articles even refer to them as "destroyers."
    I couldn't find any information about "Alive", but there is something about "Eerie".
    We didn't hand over any destroyers to Mustafa Kemal. It was handed over boat from a category called "naval fighters"These boats are about ten times smaller than destroyers. They are essentially torpedo boats, only without torpedo tubes. A Greenport-class boat, built in the USA, was delivered. Standard displacement: 14,2 tons.
    full 18 t.,
    Dimensions: length 18,2 m, width 2,7 m, draft 1 m.
    Engine power is 600 hp,
    Speed ​​20 knots,
    Range 486 miles.
    Armament: one 47mm and one 37mm cannon, two machine guns.
    Crew 8 man.
    Built in 1917, seven (7) units were delivered to Sevastopol on October 9, 1917. They joined the Black Sea Fleet under the names: "Smel", "Zhutkiy", "Pylkiy", and "Bespokoiny" (Restless), delivered to the Sea of ​​Azov in July 1920, "Pronzitelnyy" and "Derzkiy". In June 1918, they were transported by rail from Novorossiysk to Tsaritsyn, where they were part of the Volga Military Flotilla and the Caspian Sea Naval Forces. "Smel", "Zhutkiy", "Pylkiy", and "Bespokoiny" (Restless), "Pronzitelnyy" and "Derzkiy".
    Their fate.
    The Zorkiy was lost during a storm on December 25, 1921. The Zhutkiy was handed over to Mustafa Kemal in 1921 and served in the Turkish Navy until 1927. Turkey then returned it to us. After its return, the Zhutkiy was dismantled for spare parts.
    "Bespokoyny" and "Pylkiy" were scrapped in the early 1930s, the remaining three were decommissioned in 1923–1925.

    Perhaps "Zhivoy" was also from this series, but was produced later? Or perhaps someone was renamed and transferred under the name "Zhivoy."
    In any case, "Zhivoy" is not a destroyer.
    1. +3
      30 January 2026 11: 10
      It's a little off. It should be like this.
      They joined the Black Sea Fleet under the names: "Bold", "Sharp-sighted", "Terrible", "Ardent", "Restless", "Piercing" and "Daring".
      From fate.
      "Zorkiy", "Zhutkiy", "Pylkiy" and "Bespokoinyy" were delivered to the Sea of ​​Azov in July 1920,
      In June 1918, Pronzitelny and Derzky were transported by rail from Novorossiysk to Tsaritsyn, where they became part of the Volga Military Flotilla and the Caspian Sea Naval Forces.
    2. 0
      30 January 2026 16: 39
      Quote: Seal
      In any case, "Zhivoy" is not a destroyer.

      Now it's clear, thank you.
      1. +4
        30 January 2026 17: 15
        Quote: Senior Sailor
        Now it's clear, thank you.
        You're welcome. I looked into this issue because it was always previously reported that the destroyers "Zhivoy" and "Zhutkiy" were transferred. So I couldn't understand how Soviet Russia suddenly had destroyers in the Black Sea in 1921? And apparently in such large numbers that we were able to transfer two of them to Turkey. After all, there was nowhere for them to come from. During the evacuation of Crimea, the armed forces of Southern Russia took with them everything that was more or less afloat. And what wasn't, they sank. But historians are short-tempered and don't want to speculate, they just copy each other. So, I searched and found that these were "naval fighters."
        I apologize for the text being a bit choppy. The internet is slow. My hand also often types "iz" instead of "their" and vice versa. am
  13. +2
    30 January 2026 11: 15
    Aralov's merits are obvious, but why Voroshilov ended up next to Ataturk is a big question.
    Not much - at that time, Kliment Efremovich was the commander of the North Caucasus Military District and was in contact with Kamal, since weapons and ammunition were supplied to Turkey through his district.
    Accordingly, in Kamal's opinion, Voroshilov was a larger figure than Frunze, which is why the famous monument depicts a sculpture of Voroshilov.
    But Frunze, being only a military adviser in Turkey, was not awarded this honor.
    In addition to weapons, the Bolsheviks gave Kamal 10-12 million rubles in gold and provided food supplies.
    1. +1
      30 January 2026 11: 41
      Kamal
      Kemal - made a typo
    2. -4
      30 January 2026 12: 27
      Quote: Marrr
      In addition to weapons, the Bolsheviks gave Kamal 10-12 million rubles in gold and provided food supplies.

      during the worst famine in Russia...
      1. +3
        30 January 2026 13: 17
        The Turks prevented the explosion of the Baku oil fields – and in doing so, they cut off all Soviet aid tenfold. Under the economic blockade, oil production in Baku would have been restored, God willing, by the 1930s.
        1. +1
          30 January 2026 13: 48
          Quote: vet
          Under the economic blockade, oil production in Baku could have been restored, God willing, by the 1930s.
          The West wouldn't have given us such a head start. And it would have swallowed us up, perhaps even while Lenin was still alive.
          1. -1
            30 January 2026 20: 17
            Quote: Seal
            The West wouldn't have given us such a head start. And it would have swallowed us up, perhaps even while Lenin was still alive.

            That's why the West supplied us with machine tools and equipment before WWII, without which there would not have been an army capable of winning - so they could devour us?
            1. +3
              30 January 2026 20: 28
              At first, they cooperated with Germany—a major victory for Soviet diplomacy. But Germany itself was in dire straits. Large-scale industrialization only began in 1933, after diplomatic ties were established with the United States, and only because the United States was in the midst of the Great Depression. The Americans had no choice, but the USSR offered money. And so the USSR began buying not just machine tools from the United States, but entire state-of-the-art factories.
              1. +1
                30 January 2026 20: 51
                Quote: vet
                And the USSR began to buy from the USA not just machine tools, but entire state-of-the-art factories.

                So I know - that's why I'm saying - it's unlikely that they had the desire to eat us at that moment - they had other things to do.
                1. +2
                  30 January 2026 20: 59
                  1920 and 1933 are a very long period of time. Without Baku oil, we might not have survived.
        2. -2
          30 January 2026 15: 20
          Quote: vet
          Under the economic blockade, oil production in Baku could have been restored, God willing, by the 1930s.

          It wasn't that difficult, it wasn't modern drilling equipment.
          Besides, one explosion won't destroy the entire infrastructure, only a small part of it, and will temporarily paralyze neighboring businesses. Yes, it's unpleasant and expensive, but not for long.
          1. +5
            30 January 2026 17: 24
            Quote: multicaat
            besides, 1 explosion
            And who told you there had to be only one explosion? At that time, the British were in the Persian ports on the Caspian Sea. They would have helped the Musavatists put the Baku oil fields out of action for decades to come. If only the Musavatists had had any time. But as soon as Khalil Pasha (Mustafa Kemal's emissary) forced the Azerbaijani generals to restore the railway from Soviet Russia to Azerbaijan, which had recently been dismantled on the orders of those same generals, our armored trains immediately rushed along it straight to Baku. So the Musavatists ran out of time.
  14. -1
    30 January 2026 11: 58
    The Turks maintained their gratitude to the USSR even after the death of Kemal Ataturk – unlike the Bulgarians and Romanians

    Gratitude and ingratitude of citizens of one country to citizens (government) of another country is public opinion, carefully formed among the citizens of the country by the state propaganda organs in favor of the interests of the ruling elite, existing at a given moment in time.
  15. +3
    30 January 2026 12: 10
    A minor quibble on my part, which doesn't affect the high quality of the material discussed. It says, "But Aralov remained: from January 5, 1921 to April 29, 1923, he served as the Plenipotentiary Representative (Ambassador) of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to Turkey." It should be clarified that the RSFSR, prior to the adoption of the 1936 Constitution of the USSR and the 1937 Constitution of the RSFSR, was called the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic. That is, after the adoption of these constitutions, the word order changed while the previous abbreviation remained.
  16. +2
    30 January 2026 12: 11
    Unfortunately, Soviet textbooks say nothing at all about these events, but it was all very interesting—how the USSR was being built in the south. Events in Ukraine, the war with Poland, events in Bessarabia, the occupation of the Black Sea coast, Turkey, and the situation with the Strait. A big plus for the article.
  17. +3
    30 January 2026 13: 47
    Quote: Olgovich
    and Kars has been discussed for a long time at the vet's.
    Hello to you, 40 years is "for a long time" ?
    Quote: Olgovich
    Actually, read the captions under the Brest betrayal - Türkiye is there.
    And you should have read what they write to you, and you start torturing the keyboard without reading it. This is
    It was the Germans, not the Turks, who defeated us by force. On the Turkish front, we spent the entire First World War winning. But, alas, we essentially lost to the Germans, albeit due to our own internal problems. But these internal problems were caused by the protracted war—a war primarily with the Germans and secondarily with the Austrians. And the Germans, in Brest, set conditions for us that took into account the interests of all their allies. Only Bulgaria got nothing from us.
    Who did I write to? I wrote to you!! And you either didn't read it or didn't understand. Or pretended not to understand.
    Quote: Olgovich
    and not your inventions
    My "inventions"? And what did you consider "inventions," let me ask. This:
    It is the combination of these three factors:
    1. Fidel's request for increased aid after the defeat of the Cuban Contras in the Bay of Pigs.
    2. In the spring of 1962, Soviet intelligence received copies of the plan for a nuclear strike on the USSR and a list of cities that would become targets for American missiles.
    3. The subsequent receipt by the USSR of information that a strike on Cuba was scheduled for the autumn of 1962.
    And they led to Khrushchev’s decision to deploy our missiles in Cuba.
    The fact that the US had previously deployed its missiles in Izmir was merely an official pretext.

    Which of these is supposedly "fiction"?
    Quote: Olgovich
    we approached the map,
    I don't need to look at the map. I've had it in my head for a long time now. But you should look at the map more often. And study it.

    P.S. So where would you have kept your troops in 1941-1942, if you were Inönü?
    1. -3
      31 January 2026 11: 20
      Quote: Seal
      Hello, 40 years is a long time ago.

      no, "recently" lol especially compared to Erzurum.
      Quote: Seal
      And you should have read what they write to you, instead of starting to torture the keyboard,

      You have been given a very clear answer to this nonsense - read Brest 18. What is not clear?
      Quote: Seal
      My "inventions"?

      Your missiles in Cuba are the answer to the missiles in Turkey. Soviet strategists realized that they were practically defenseless against these missiles, but that they could achieve some nuclear parity by taking a retaliatory step – by deploying missiles in Cuba.
      What's not clear?
      Quote: Seal
      I don't need to approach the map. Because I've had the map in my head for a long time now.

      I remember, I remember-millions of km2 of water surface. lol
    2. +3
      31 January 2026 13: 10
      Quote: Seal
      P.S. So where would you have kept your troops in 1941-1942, if you were Inönü?

      Bulgaria fought on Hitler's side; the Turks did not. Had Stalin offered Turkey the annexation of part of Bulgaria south of the Balkans, there would have been a chance of Turkey joining the war against the Reich in the fall of 1943.
      1. +1
        4 February 2026 14: 14
        Quote: gsev
        If Stalin had offered Turkey to annex part of Bulgaria south of the Balkans, there would have been a chance for Turkey to enter the war against the Reich in the autumn of 1943.
        In 1943, an offer from Joseph Vissarionovich alone wasn't enough. Britain and the United States needed to make a similar offer to Turkey. Firstly, they were officially at war with Bulgaria. Secondly, Churchill had no intention of handing Bulgaria over to Joseph Stalin in 1943. Thirdly, Churchill (and probably the United States as well) had already reached an agreement with Greece to hand over part of Bulgarian territory to Greece after Victory Day, which is what ultimately happened.
        In principle, if this issue had been raised at the Tehran Conference and the Big Three had reached agreement on it, there would indeed have been a chance. But that's a conditional proposition.
        1. +1
          4 February 2026 14: 40
          Quote: Seal
          It was necessary for Britain and the United States to make a similar offer to Turkey.
          Even if Turkey had attacked Germany in 1944, Churchill would hardly have opposed it. In early 1944, he feared losing India. The Indian National Army was marching with Japan on Kohima, and there was a high probability that Indian soldiers would defect. And in 1942, when Tobruk and Singapore fell...
          1. +1
            4 February 2026 15: 02
            Quote: gsev
            If Türkiye had attacked Germany even in 1944, Churchill would hardly have opposed it.
            There's no doubt about it. What I'm saying is that taking away part of Bulgaria's territory for this attack and handing it over to Turkey could only have been done with the consent of all members of the Big Three. Or, at the very least, this should have been agreed upon beforehand between Churchill and Stalin.
  18. +3
    30 January 2026 16: 20
    Damn, just when you want to criticize Lenin for helping Ataturk, all sorts of Olgovichs come running, and after reading them, you begin to understand: Ilyich did everything right.
  19. +4
    30 January 2026 20: 31
    Quote: Level 2 Advisor
    That's why the West supplied us with machine tools and equipment before WWII, without which there would not have been an army capable of winning - so they could devour us?
    Let's not confuse the concepts. We were talking about the period 1920-1925. Back then, if we hadn't had Baku oil, the West could have easily devoured us.
    It was precisely because Soviet Russia, thanks to Baku oil, survived from 1920 to 1925 and by 1930 had become a fairly powerful nation that the United States sold us entire refineries during the Great Depression. They even sent teams of their engineers and even workers to build and commission these refineries. The situation in the early 1930s was completely different from that of April 1920.
  20. +2
    30 January 2026 20: 48
    Quote: Olgovich
    during the worst famine in Russia...
    This aid was necessary to ensure Russia's own security. And it was only intended for a few million people. But after World War II, from which the Soviet Union emerged victoriousIn 1946-1947, the USSR also experienced a widespread famine. Due to food shortages in 1946, 100 million rural residents were taken off rations, forcing them to subsist solely on what they grew in their own gardens. Many collective farms stopped issuing grain for labor, and bread prices doubled. Despite this, the USSR assumed responsibility for food supplies (as well as oil products and coal) for virtually all countries of the future socialist camp. Moreover, during this period, at the direction of the Party and Government, a State Food Reserve was created in the event of a new, possibly nuclear, war. Food was also withdrawn from civilian circulation to fill it.
    1. -3
      31 January 2026 11: 46
      Quote: Seal
      This aid was necessary to ensure Russia's own security. And it was sent solely on the basis of several million people.

      Yes, 5 million Russian people died of hunger, because the gold went to the Turks, Estonians and other abominations.
      Security is Russia in Kars, not Türkiye near Batumi.
      Quote: Seal
      But, despite this, the USSR took over the food supply (as well as the provision of oil products and coal) of essentially almost all the countries of the future socialist camp.

      you are downright proud of this crime against своих Romanian citizens ate Soviet bread, while across the river ours died of hunger and cannibalism

      In the Gagauz village of Tomai, this Sunday, April 27, a monument to the victims of the famine of 1946-1947 was erected.

      A memorial now stands at the local cemetery, marking the mass grave of those who tragically died of starvation. The initiator of this monument, village councilor Petr Balaban, thanked everyone who "didn't remain indifferent" and responded to the call to perpetuate the memory of their ancestors.

      “Before the hunger strike began, there were people living in our village about eight thousand residents, and only four thousand people survived the famineThis tragedy claimed the lives of thousands of residents.
      1. +2
        31 January 2026 13: 24
        Quote: Olgovich
        Security is Russia in Kars, not Türkiye near Batumi.

        In all the wars in which Turkey was in military alliance with the Western powers, Russia suffered defeat. Peter the Great's Pruth Campaign, the Crimean War, and World War I. When Turkey maintained neutrality, Russia withstood attacks from the West. The Russo-Swedish War up to and including Poltava, the Time of Troubles and the Swedish intervention, Napoleon's invasion of Russia, and World War II. For Russia, what's vitally important isn't Kars and Erzurum, but maintaining the status quo in Abkhazia and South Ossetia and liberating the Russian lands occupied by Western powers.
        1. -3
          31 January 2026 15: 30
          Quote: gsev
          In all the wars in which Türkiye was in military alliance with the Western powers, Russia suffered defeat.

          Türkiye lost all wars with Russia, except for the Prut campaign and the Crimean War, and also lost WWI
          1. +2
            31 January 2026 15: 38
            Quote: Olgovich
            Türkiye has lost all wars with Russia.

            In World War I, Russia capitulated before Turkey and, as a result, lost land to Turkey. This was a clear and most decisive Turkish victory over Russia. Furthermore, you've forgotten Russia's defeat in the war with Turkey in the 17th century. The Astrakhan campaign cannot be considered a defeat for Turkey. The Turks didn't take Astrakhan, but they plundered Russian lands to their heart's content. According to Turkish historians, the ratio of victories to defeats in the Russo-Turkish wars was slightly in Russia's favor. And if you consider Russia's defeats in Libya and Syria, the odds are already in Turkey's favor. Azerbaijan's seizure of Nagorno-Karabakh under the leadership of Aliyev and Pashinyan is also a Turkish victory over Russia.
            1. -5
              31 January 2026 15: 52
              Quote: gsev
              Russia capitulated before Turkey in World War I, and as a result, lost land to Turkey. This was Turkey's clear and most decisive victory over Russia.

              belay The Bolsheviks had nothing to do with Russia, Türkiye lost WWI, if you don't know
              Quote: gsev
              Have you forgotten Russia's defeat in the war with Turkey in the 17th century?

              not to forget what never happened.
              Quote: gsev
              According to Turkish historians, the ratio of victories and defeats in the Russo-Turkish wars is slightly in Russia's favor.

              lol very valuable specialists.
              Quote: gsev
              And if we take into account Russia's defeats in Libya and Syria, the odds are already in favor of Turkey. Azerbaijan's seizure of Nagorno-Karabakh under the leadership of Aliyev and Pashinyan is also a Turkish victory over Russia.

              Russia's defeat is the creation of Assyrians, Ussrs, and Rivs on its territory 100 years ago.
              1. +5
                31 January 2026 16: 19
                Quote: Olgovich
                not to forget what never happened.

                Have you been blocked from accessing materials about the Russo-Turkish War of 1672-1681? Read about the Treaty of Bkhchisaray of 1681. Under it, Russia ceded Right-Bank Turkish Ukraine to Turkey and obligated itself to pay tribute to the Crimean Khan. These terms clearly indicate Turkey's victory. Of course, fighting Russia is always difficult for anyone, and the results of that war are only a small part of Turkey's plans at the start of the hostilities.
                1. -5
                  31 January 2026 16: 36
                  Quote: gsev
                  about the Russo-Turkish War of 1672-1681?

                  The Treaty of Bakhchisarai consolidated the status quo in the region, according to which the Dnieper became the border of the possessions and neither side could expand its influence.
                  Quote: gsev
                  Great Britain didn't give the American colonies much rights and lost them. But those colonists were English-speaking, not foreigners or aliens to the English.

                  You compared... Novorossiya with the USA?!
                  Quote: gsev
                  In the West, Denikin's army, the Armed Forces of South Russia, is often considered a separatist formation.

                  great authority - the West lol
                  Quote: gsev
                  Denikin was sent to Siberia to destroy first the Komuch Party and then the Soviet Union by British intelligence after Kolchak applied to join the British service.

                  lol
                  1. +2
                    31 January 2026 18: 47
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    The Treaty of Bakhchisarai cemented the status quo in the region
                    But after Peter the Great's Prut adventure, Russia was forced to give up Azov and all other hard-won territories, give up access to the Sea of ​​Azov, liquidate the Azov flotilla (some of the ships were bought cheaply by the Turks), and resume paying tribute to the Crimean Khan!
                  2. +3
                    31 January 2026 18: 57
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    The Treaty of Bakhchisarai consolidated the status quo in the region,

                    Before the Treaty of Bakhchisarai, Chyhyryn, according to the Union of Pereyaslav, was part of Russia. Chyhyryn, in turn, was in Right-Bank Ukraine. You're trying to advance a false hypothesis based on facts that support my opinion. Why and for what reasons? Incidentally, Russia's reunification with Ukraine was largely due to the Crimean Khanate's military support for Bohdan Khmelnytsky. At the beginning of the fighting against the Poles for the liberation of Ukrainians from Polish rule, the bulk of Bohdan Khmelnytsky's troops were Crimean Tatars. All of Bohdan Khmelnytsky's successes in the war against Poland before the alliance with Russia occurred during the lifetime of the outstanding Crimean Tatar commander, Tugay Bey. With his death, military fortune returned to the Poles. Thus, Russia's key victory, which began its journey from being an object of expansion for the Swedes, Poles, and Muslims to becoming a world power, occurred thanks to a military alliance with a Turkish vassal.
                    1. -3
                      1 February 2026 10: 31
                      Quote: gsev
                      Before the Treaty of Bakhchisarai, Chigirin was part of Russia according to the Union of Pereyaslav

                      and the Turks admitted this? belay lol
                      Quote: gsev
                      Thus, Russia's key victory, which began its journey to becoming a world power from an object of expansion by the Swedes, Poles, and Muslims, occurred thanks to a military alliance with a vassal of Turkey.

                      nonsense.
                      1. +2
                        1 February 2026 13: 55
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        nonsense.

                        The Time of Troubles. Russia lost Smolensk, and vast territories from Novgorod to Tula were depopulated. Half a century later, Poland was bled dry in the war against the Tatars and Ukrainians of 1648-1654. During the war of 1654-1667, Russia's most dangerous adversary suffered heavy losses and ceded Chernikov and Kyiv (the mother of Russian cities and an important center of Russian Orthodoxy) to Russia. It was precisely this significant loss of Poland's human and material resources that made it less of a threat to Russia. I believe this was a crucial turning point in Russian history. Since the 19th century, Europe had believed that the destruction of the Slavs must begin with the separation of Ukraine from Russia. Accordingly, Ukraine's return to Russia was a necessary and crucial step for Russia's survival.
                      2. -3
                        1 February 2026 14: 31
                        Quote: gsev
                        Poland bled dry in the war against the Tatars and Ukrainians 1648-1654 years old

                        and who fought against Russia... for 13 years?
                        The Zaporozhian Cossacks were bled dry and beaten after their first successes.

                        And yes, there was no smell of “Ukrainians” back then, they called themselves Russian people.
                        Quote: gsev
                        In the 19th century, it was believed that the destruction of the Slavs should begin with the separation of Ukraine from Russia.

                        What was Ukraine like in the 19th century?
                      3. +2
                        1 February 2026 16: 52
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        What was Ukraine like in the 19th century?

                        Probably something like this:
                      4. +1
                        1 February 2026 16: 53
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        And yes, there was no smell of any “Ukrainians” back then; they called themselves Russian people.
                        Which did not stop them from fighting against the Moscow Tsar.
                      5. +1
                        1 February 2026 21: 28
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        The Zaporozhian Cossacks were bled dry and beaten after their first successes.

                        Nevertheless, the Poles suffered a defeat, having been beaten in the 17th century by the Tatars, Russians and Swedes along with the Zaporozhian Cossacks.
                      6. -4
                        2 February 2026 14: 17
                        Quote: gsev
                        the Poles were defeated in the 17th century

                        The Zaporozhian Cossacks suffered defeat, but Russia saved them in a difficult war
                      7. +4
                        2 February 2026 16: 47
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        The Zaporozhian Cossacks suffered defeat, but Russia saved them in a difficult war

                        At the beginning of the war for the liberation of Ukraine from the Polish yoke, Crimean Tatars outnumbered Orthodox Christians in the allied army of Khmelnytsky and Tugai-Bey. Moreover, the quality of the Crimean Tatar fighters was superior. One could say that the Crimean Tatar Central Military District in Ukraine lasted from 1648 to 1651. Tugai Bey's role in liberating Ukraine from the Polish-Catholic yoke was no less significant than the contribution of Girkin and Strelkov to the liberation of Donbas.
                  3. +5
                    31 January 2026 19: 04
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    great authority - the West

                    Western historians exposed the weaknesses in Russian society, and thanks to their agents, Gorbachev and Yeltsin, they destroyed Russia in 1991. So they are professionals in their field. History is a purely applied science, the technique of distinguishing truth from deception. It must be studied and understood by politicians, intelligence officers, and diplomats.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Denikin sent to Siberia to destroy Komuch first

                    I'm getting old. Kolchak, of course. Kolchak had the Astrakhan Army—a German proxy force, which he sent to seize Astrakhan for the Germans and access to Baku oil. This is the testimony of Adjutant Krasnov from his memoirs, published in the US after 1945.
                    1. -3
                      1 February 2026 11: 23
                      Quote: gsev
                      Western historians have exposed the weaknesses in Russian society, and thanks to their agents: Gorbachev and Yeltsin destroyed Russia in 1991.

                      What powerful historians... lol
                      it collapsed as it was built
                      Quote: gsev
                      Kolchak had the Astrakhan Army, a German proxy force, which he sent to capture Astrakhan for the Germans.

                      the alternative has begun...
                      1. +2
                        1 February 2026 14: 15
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Kolchak had the Astrakhan Army

                        Yes, Denikin did.
                      2. -4
                        1 February 2026 14: 33
                        Quote: gsev
                        Yes, Denikin did.

                        pro-German ... of the Entente Denikin lol
                      3. +3
                        1 February 2026 21: 40
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        pro-German ... of the Entente Denikin

                        Yes. The Germans supplied Denikin with shells through Krasnov. Surely he had to repay the Germans somehow?
              2. +3
                31 January 2026 16: 24
                Quote: Olgovich
                Russia's defeat is the creation of Assyrians, Ussrs, and Rivs on its territory 100 years ago.

                Great Britain didn't grant the American colonies much rights and lost them. But those colonists were English-speaking, not foreigners or aliens to the British. In the West, Denikin's army, the Armed Forces of South Russia, is often considered a separatist group. Semyonov and Ungern were simply Japanese stooges. Denikin was sent to Siberia to crush first the Komuch Party and then the Soviet Union by British intelligence after Kolchak applied to join the British service.
              3. +1
                31 January 2026 18: 53
                The Bolsheviks had nothing to do with Russia, Türkiye lost WWI, if you don't know
                Really? Well then, name me the legitimate Russian government that accepted Turkey's capitulation at Versailles in 1919? laughing laughing laughing
                1. -4
                  1 February 2026 12: 13
                  Quote: The Meaning of Life
                  In 1919, Versailles accepted the capitulation of Turkey?

                  Turkey was torn apart by the Entente in Sèvres in 1920
                  Quote: The Meaning of Life
                  And Russia's victory is the creation of 14 independent states on its territory 35 years ago.

                  Quote: The Meaning of Life
                  And Russia's victory is the creation of 14 independent states on its territory 35 years ago.

                  They were created from 1917 to 1940, according to the USSR Constitution, and dispersed in 1991.
                  1. 0
                    1 February 2026 16: 45
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Turkey was torn apart by the Entente in Sèvres in 1920
                    So who represented Russia there? laughing

                    They were created from 1917 to 1940 - read the Constitution of the USSR
                    I read it. I didn't find anything like that there. But I did find that the countries proclaimed in 1917-1918 (not by the Bolsheviks!) were united into a single state through the efforts of Comrade Lenin.

                    When the anti-Soviet forces destroyed what Lenin had created, the former constituent parts of the unified country again became what they had been in 1917-1920: bourgeois-nationalist-Russophobic. And they blame Lenin for the occupation.
                    And Russian anti-Sovietists are bending over backwards to shift the blame for their crimes of destroying the country onto others. And they blame Lenin for not leaving them the 1913-style empire as a legacy, which their ideological ancestors had squandered by 1917.
                    1. -4
                      2 February 2026 14: 37
                      .
                      Quote: The Meaning of Life
                      I read it. I didn't find anything like that there. But I did find that the countries proclaimed in 1917-1918 (not by the Bolsheviks!) were united into a single state through the efforts of Comrade Lenin.

                      Article 76. Union republic - sovereign state, which merged with others
                      Soviet republics into the Union


                      And who created the Ussrs?
                      Quote: The Meaning of Life
                      When the anti-Soviet forces destroyed what Lenin had created,

                      They created it with such quality that it collapsed on its own.
                      1. +1
                        3 February 2026 05: 32
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Article 76.
                        Firstly, this is from the 1977 constitution, so neither Lenin nor Stalin have anything to do with it. And secondly, which united with other Soviet republics into the UnionWhat's not clear to you? Only someone with artistic talent could claim that the republics were independent countries before 1991.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        And who created the Ussrs?
                        What other ussrs?

                        They created it with such quality that it collapsed on its own.
                        And now the same thing about the Russian Empire.
                      2. -2
                        3 February 2026 12: 13
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Firstly, this is from the 1977 constitution, so neither Lenin nor Stalin have anything to do with it.

                        in all constitutions 24,36 these are STATES with borders and right of exit.
                        So they came out.

                        Who gave you permission to cut off Russian Odessa from Russia and turn it into Mykolaiv?
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        What other ussrs?

                        belay lol
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        And now the same thing about the Russian Empire.

                        belay You fought with Russia for 36 years, shooting, imprisoning, depriving millions of opponents, but the USSR collapsed in an instant - without a war, with no regard for the meaning of life.
                      3. -1
                        3 February 2026 18: 42
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        in all constitutions 24,36 are STATES
                        Please provide a link to constitutions 24 and 36.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        with boundaries and the right of exit.
                        But during the entire Soviet era, not a single one of them wanted to leave. But when the clause on the leading role of the CPSU was removed from the constitution (March 1990), talk of leaving immediately began. And when Yeltsin banned the Communist Party altogether (August 1991), everyone fled.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Who gave you permission to cut off Russian Odessa from Russia and turn it into Mykolaiv?
                        All claims are directed at the Central Rada. It created independent Ukraine Within these borders. The Communists first transformed this state into a Soviet one (the Ukrainian SSR), and then annexed it to Russia as part of the USSR. It's now clear they were wrong to do so: there's no gratitude from descendants anyway.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        You fought with Russia for 36 years, shooting, imprisoning, depriving millions of opponents
                        Are there stories from parallel universes?

                        The USSR collapsed in an instant
                        Not in an instant, but over several years at the very least. The Russian Empire collapsed within a week.
                      4. -2
                        4 February 2026 11: 05

                        Please provide a link to constitutions 24 and 36.


                        belay myself, myself with
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Only during the entire period of Soviet power, not one of them wanted to leave.

                        lol -at the advice and they ran away, as if the reins were pulled away
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        All claims are directed at the Central Rada. It created an independent Ukraine within these borders.

                        The VOR created the UPR and recognized its independence, as did others.
                        The DKR and OR did not recognize any UNR and were part of the RSFSR.

                        The Bolsheviks raped them and incorporated them into the Ukrainian SSR.
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Are there stories from parallel universes?

                        belay 18 million dispossessed, hundreds of thousands executed, millions in the Gulag and exile
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Not in an instant, but over several years at a minimum. The Russian Empire collapsed in just a week.

                        for one mil in December 91. Russia resisted the bandits 4 in a hot war and then for decades.
                        Not a single Union of Journalists came out for the USSR...
                      5. 0
                        4 February 2026 16: 55
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        myself, myself with
                        It's all clear. Bobik has disappeared.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        -at the advice and they ran away, as if the reins were pulled away
                        Congratulations, you liar. The Soviets not only no longer existed, they were banned.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        The VOR created the UPR and recognized its independence, as did others.
                        DKR and OR
                        Congratulations on lying again. And stop hiccupping, at least while you're typing.


                        Quote: Olgovich
                        18 million deprived
                        Under the Tsar - 80% of the population.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        hundreds of thousands of executions, millions in the gulag and exile
                        Under Nicholas I, 1,5 million were flogged to death.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Russia resisted the bandits in a hot war for 4 years and then for decades.
                        Not dozens, but hundreds. Starting with Bolotin and Stenka Razin.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Not a single Union of Journalists came out for the USSR...
                        The Olgovichi couple stuck their heads in their holes in February 17.
                      6. -2
                        5 February 2026 12: 41
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        It's all clear. Bobik has disappeared.

                        when will it arrive: it is indicated WHERE:in all constitutions of 24,36 READ them
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Congratulations, you liar. The Soviets not only no longer existed, they were banned.

                        in...1991? belay fool lol
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Congratulations again liarsAnd stop hiccupping, at least when you type.

                        At school they will teach you that before the VORs there were no UNRs or independent states.

                        There they will relieve you of hallucinations, explaining the DCR and OR.
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Under the Tsar - 80% of the population.

                        lol Your slaves are as far from freedom under the Tsar as they are from the moon in hell
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Under Nicholas I, 1,5 million were flogged to death.

                        lol
                        OGPU: ELEPHANT
                        1. Beating with sticks, rifle butts, ramrods, whips, etc.

                        2. In winter, placing prisoners in the so-called “on the rocks” in their underwear in the “attention” position for up to 3-4 hours.

                        3. In the summer, placing prisoners so-called "on mosquitoes", that is, undressed in the "attention" position.

                        4. Confinement in so-called "kibitkas", that is, punishment cells, which are small cold wooden annexes, in which prisoners were kept in their underwear for several hours during the winter. There are cases of death from freezing.

                        5. Seating on the so-called "perches", that is, narrow benches on which prisoners were seated in a squatting position and, absolutely forbidden to move or talk, were kept in this position from early morning until late evening.

                        6. Murders under the guise of escape.

                        7. Rape of women and forced cohabitation of female prisoners under supervision.

                        8. The so-called "seagulls", that is, a prisoner in winter in his underwear was taken to a pole near the pier, on which a wooden seagull was made, and forced to count: "seagull one, seagull two" - up to 2 thousand times, that is, in fact, to a state of complete exhaustion.

                        9. They forced prisoners to pour water from one ice hole to another by hand.

                        10. Prisoners were placed in their underwear in a punishment cell, a pit no more than a meter high, with a ceiling and floor lined with thorny branches. The prisoner would survive for no more than three days before dying.

                        11. The so-called "dolphins," that is, when prisoners passed over the bridge, guards would point to one or another prisoner and shout "dolphin." The prisoner was required to jump into the water; failure to comply would result in beatings and being thrown into the water, etc. Other forms of torture and abuse against prisoners
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        Not tens, but hundreds. Starting from Bolotina

                        lol Go to school, find out his last name and about his struggle for legitimate sovereign False Dmitry.
                        Stepan Razin declared himself avenger of the Tsarevich and defender of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, as Pugachev called himself Tsar Peter
                        Quote: The Meaning of Life
                        The Olgovichi couple stuck their heads in their asses in February 17.

                        They waited for the US, then they beat the bandits so badly that they were afraid of them until their deaths - no elections, no freedom of speech, nothing.

                        Where are the SZhs? There was never a squad of their "gogyachy hearts" lol .
                      7. The comment was deleted.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                      9. The comment was deleted.
                      10. The comment was deleted.
              4. 0
                31 January 2026 18: 57
                Quote: Olgovich
                Russia's defeat is the creation of Assyrians, Ussrs, and Rivs on its territory 100 years ago.
                Russia's victory was the creation of 14 independent states on its territory 35 years ago. It's no wonder they built a museum in Yekaterinburg for the winner, and last year, another one in Moscow.
            2. +1
              2 February 2026 09: 35
              Quote: gsev
              According to Turkish historians, the ratio of victories to defeats in the Russo-Turkish wars is slightly in Russia's favor.

              Yeah, only the Porte's territory was cut almost to Istanbul, but otherwise, yes, just a little bit.
      2. +4
        31 January 2026 23: 48
        This nonsense is unworthy of any attention or response. Especially in the part where I'm supposedly "proud." Olgovich is making this up himself, attributing his own fabrications to me, and then he attacks me.
        And also "
        Quote: Olgovich
        Security is Russia in Kars, not Türkiye near Batumi.
        Of course, this isn't Turkey near Batumi. But it's not Russia in Kars either. Then let's just say that Russia's security is Russia in Constantinople with control of the straits. That would be more honest. And even more security would be if Russia were also in Crete and Cyprus. And even more security would be if Russia were also in Libya and Gibraltar. And Iceland.
    2. +2
      31 January 2026 13: 15
      Quote: Seal
      To fill it, food was also withdrawn from civilian circulation.
      After 1945, the USSR gained a frontline in Central Europe, which greatly complicated bombing raids on the USSR and forced the US to attack Soviet forces in Europe rather than directly in the USSR. Furthermore, Europe's potential could be exploited. Food was supplied in exchange for industrial products, which were also needed by the USSR, whose factories had been destroyed or converted to military production during the war.
      1. +1
        4 February 2026 14: 04
        Quote: gsev
        After 1945, the USSR gained a frontline in Central Europe, which greatly complicated the bombing of the USSR and forced the United States to strike Soviet troops in Europe rather than directly in the USSR.
        Not quite so. The Americans could have launched strikes directly on Soviet territory from Norway. And also from Greece. In the Far East, from occupied Japan.
        Quote: gsev
        Food was supplied in exchange for industrial products, which were also needed by the USSR, where factories had been destroyed or converted to military production during the war.
        The same thing. In exchange for industrial products, we supplied food only to Czechoslovakia, which was perhaps the least affected by the war.
        But for Poland there is such a State Defense Committee resolution.
        Germany and Austria were considered occupied countries, from where we took away everything we wanted, free of charge, in the form of trophies.
        There was nothing to take from Romania, which, although less devastated by the war than, say, Poland, for example. The Romanians...what else can one say? However, Romania was also subject to reparations. After all, it fought on the side of the Reich. And it was the only Reich ally whose troops attacked the USSR alongside German troops on the night of June 22, 1941.
        Vladimir Fesenko, a senior researcher at the Military History Research Institute of the Supreme General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, cites examples of Soviet support for Eastern European countries. For example, in 1945, Moscow provided Romania, which initially fought on the Axis side, with 300,000 tons of grain, halved its reparations payments, and allowed it to withhold food supplies from the Red Army. In the spring of 1945, Hungary received 33,000 tons of grain, 4,000 tons of meat, 2,000 tons of sugar, and 600 tons of salt from the USSR. Also, for the first five months after the liberation of Austria, the population of Vienna relied solely on Red Army reserves for its food.
        When Soviet troops approached Yugoslavia's borders, more than 50 tons of grain were allocated, 17 tons of which were for the residents of Belgrade.
        In addition, food supplies were allocated from Soviet military warehouses for the population of Northern Norway: each resident received 1600 grams of bread, 200 grams of fat and sugar per week.

        Even during the war, the USSR managed to continue trading with other countries, with food exports generating 10 to 20 percent of the country's total foreign exchange earnings. In 1941, food sales totaled 22,5 million rubles, in 1942 – 39,2 million, and in 1943 – 45,4 million. The largest exports were wheat, flour, sugar, vodka, and spirits. With the upheaval of World War II came a turnaround in foreign trade. In 1944, food exports reached 113,9 million rubles, and in the first eight months of 1945 – 127,3 million. At the same time, the share of cereals and caviar exports increased, while sugar and flour were sold abroad in even greater quantities. After Victory Day, according to the collection "Foreign Trade of the USSR in the Postwar Period (1946-1966), the category "Food Products and Raw Materials for Their Production" accounted for 29,8 percent of all exports. Grain, in fact, was one of the most important export commodities: in the first postwar year, its share among other categories reached 21,4 percent. In 1946, 1,7 million tons of grain were sold: wheat, rye, barley, and corn. Almost all of Europe bought it from the Soviet Union: Belgium, Bulgaria, Brazil, Great Britain, Hungary, East Germany, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Finland, France, Czechoslovakia, and Sweden. Refined sugar, vegetable oils, fish, and canned fish were also actively traded. However, these goods were now primarily of interest to the allies of the socialist camp.
        Source: Why the USSR Sold Grain to Other Countries During the 1946 Famine - Russian Seven
        1. +1
          4 February 2026 14: 15
          Quote: Seal
          There was nothing to take from Romania, which, although less devastated during the war than, for example, Poland.

          The USSR exported modern oil industry equipment from Romania. The halving of reparations from Romania was prompted by US protests and the Romanian Minister of Defence's reasoned statement to Stalin that such extensive equipment exports from Romania were undermining its economy. The USSR even managed to export a large amount of military equipment from China. However, there were problems with its safety and the ability of Russian engineers to use this equipment domestically. For example, in Tajikistan, it was only in 2017 that they were able to use trophies from Germany, which had been gathering dust there since 1946, in industrial use.
  21. +3
    31 January 2026 13: 05
    Quote: Konnick
    It's not the Turks who have forgotten, but Erdogan who has become an Islamist...

    Erdogan is not as hostile to Russia as the current governments of the Czech Republic and Bulgaria. Turkey's policy can be considered neutral, but it does not abandon its NATO commitments and is exploiting the events in Ukraine to export weapons.
  22. +2
    1 February 2026 19: 59
    Thanks to Valery for the interesting article! And S.I. Aralov deserves a separate article; he's an extraordinary figure. I wonder, though, whether I.V. Stalin wanted to attack Turkey, to recapture Kars, and so on? My great-uncle served his military service in Armenia in the early 50s. He talked a lot about the frequent military exercises, how there were so many troops, and how they even climbed Mount Aragats. He even showed me his mountaineering badge.
  23. -1
    2 February 2026 01: 46
    Excellent article, excellent approach by the author!