Military Review

May 9 capitulated to the Soviet Union not only Germany, but the entire West

60
Stalin forced the coalition allies to play by our rules.


Strictly speaking, we, the USSR, could well celebrate Victory Day over fascist Germany on May 2. Because to this day Hitler had already committed suicide, we rejected the proposal of the Reichkhanzler Goebbels who had replaced him to conclude a separate peace, after which he also committed suicide, the Reichstag was taken, on 6 o'clock in the morning 2 in May General of Weedling with three generals passed Berlin front line and surrendered. An hour later, the surrender of the Berlin garrison was signed. As such, the war was over. Then there was the strategic Prague operation and the elimination of certain small centers of resistance of the Wehrmacht.

May 9 capitulated to the Soviet Union not only Germany, but the entire West


Thus, if we consider the end of the war to be the fall of Berlin and the liquidation of organized resistance, this is May 2. If we consider the end of the war the end of all hostilities, then they lasted until the end of May, even the Prague operation was launched by Soviet troops 9 in May, after the surrender of Germany and ended by May 12. That is, in general, perhaps a different definition of a solemn date. Former allies of the USSR in the West, as we know, celebrate the end of the 8 war in May, when the German command signed a surrender to them without our participation. We could celebrate 2 in May, when the defeat of Germany was really carried out by us.

But we celebrate Victory Day 9 May. And not only because Keitel re-signed the Act of unconditional surrender in our presence on this day. It was only a form. The original meaning was deeper than surrender itself. First of all, what was shown and proved was of importance: the war will be over not when Germany and anyone else wants to stop it, but only when we consider it over.

The USSR had the opportunity to conclude a separate peace with Germany already in the 1944 year, then in the spring of 1945 of the year, 30 of April, when this world offered Goebbels, who for a short time headed the country. Of course, we did not conclude it because we made a commitment to the allies that such peace would not be concluded. But also because they showed the Germans: “You broke the 1939 peace treaty of the year. You are out of trust. There is nothing to talk about with you: no mercy. ”

We not only repelled the aggression of the enemy, we destroyed and punished those who were unable to fulfill their obligations. And they showed everyone, including the then allies: so it will be with everyone. For perjury is not just punishment, but destruction. We made it clear: we will not stop half way. In the eastern political culture, at the junction of the borders of Turkey, Iran and Georgia, boiling oil or molten lead was poured into the mouth for an oath to crime. Stalin remembered that.

But the USSR did not take revenge on Germany at that time — it was he who showed THAT with everyone who ... Perhaps it was this demonstration that played its role later, when the new rivals and opponents of the USSR did not dare to start a war with us, even when it seemed to them that they are stronger.

By 9 May 1945, Stalin no longer thought about the leaders of the Reich - they no longer existed for him. He thought about the allies and warned them about future betrayal. In Karlshorst, he showed the United States and Great Britain and their political elites: “If anything - you will be next here. Look: this is how you will sign your future unconditional surrender in the suburbs taken by storming of London and Washington. And there will be no intermediate solutions, truce, concessions ”.

Likewise, then Nuremberg was needed not so much to hang Goering, as to demonstrate to the leaders of the West: if that happens, we will also hang you.

The world is always built on the taboo of war. The world is strong when it is upsetting to break it, even with an 99-percent confidence in its superiority, the very reminder of this very single last percentage already plunges into a state of panic terror.

After 1945, this happened more than once, and when during the Caribbean crisis the American command assured President Kennedy that he could ensure victory and a reflection of our blow, he asked: “Well, if not?”, And the generals, remembering Karlshorst and Nuremberg, not found what to answer.

9 May in Karlshorst, Stalin showed the great victorious powers their future, waiting for them if they decide to break the accepted rules of the game, and they never decided to break them. Moreover, it was by insisting on the re-signing of the Act of unconditional surrender, he forced (in a hidden form) to capitulate to themselves. He forced them to play by our rules, and argued that the rules would be the ones to which he agreed. They tried to explain that the capitulation, they say, had already been signed, and even the representative of the USSR, General Susloparov, who represented the General Headquarters, was present, and there was no need to hold the ceremony again. But in response they received: "And now - once again squatting." And "squatting" - not only Germany, but all the rest.

That is, May 9 is not only Victory Day over Germany. It is also a day for the Allies to fulfill their obligations to fulfill the established rules of the game. This is the day of their small, internal and not fully advertised, but capitulation to the USSR, which determined all subsequent developments.

In theory, how should the events develop if the allies refused to re-sign the Act? The USSR would still consider Germany as a belligerent and would, after perhaps a brief respite, begin to destroy the units of the Wehrmacht. The latter would go to the Western zone. The USSR would first demand from the allies their destruction, and then - after the natural failure of the "allies" (now - in quotes) to destroy the capitulations, he would simply start to destroy them on the territory occupied by the troops of the United States and England.

Accepting Germany’s surrender only by these countries, without recognizing the USSR, would mean a separate peace, that is, a violation of previous commitments and the cancellation of all others. The Allied armies would have to counteract the movement of Soviet troops to the Atlantic and the destruction of the remnants of the Wehrmacht — that is, to enter the war with the USSR. As far as they were ready for a serious war, their flight to the Ardennes showed. At the same time, they would have guerrilla communist armies of French and Italian communists in the rear, plus at least de Gaulle's army, constantly tattered by Churchill and at that time inclined to union with the USSR. To top it off, the British and American soldiers themselves in that state simply would not understand what the generals want from them. Most likely, the Allied armies would have been partly destroyed, partly expelled from Europe. And this, not to mention such things as the need to fight with Japan, which, with such a development of events, turned out to be an unwitting ally of the USSR — in fact, the United States and Great Britain should have, like only Germany, fought on two fronts. Moreover, the USSR would have fought with them, as with the Wehrmacht, and Japan - not the way they fought with Germany.

Everyone understood everything. And the Allies capitulated after Germany. Although formally the USSR was in a state of war in Germany until January 25 1955, when the Decree of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR to end the war was adopted. Here, by the way, is another date that can be celebrated.

But May 9 was left on May 9 — in the afternoon, when the West recognized that they could only oppose the USSR within the framework of the rules determined by the USSR.

The only question is whether current Russia and its leadership understand these rules.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.km.ru/v-rossii/2013/05/08/istoriya-vtoroi-mirovoi-voiny/710424-9-maya-pered-sovetskim-soyuzom-kapitulirova
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 11 May 2013 07: 17 New
    +9
    Well, well, there is logic in this. "+"
    1. Prokop
      Prokop 11 May 2013 08: 05 New
      11
      If Stalin hadn’t forced Keitel to re-sign the act of unconditional surrender, it seems to me that the Americans and the British would later argue that their victory and not our achievement (as in the First World War) and would justify it legally.
      1. krokodil25
        krokodil25 11 May 2013 08: 42 New
        +4
        Quote: Prokop
        If Stalin hadn’t forced Keitel to re-sign the act of unconditional surrender, it seems to me that the Americans and the British would later argue that their victory and not our achievement (as in the First World War) and would justify it legally.

        They are still trying to claim that they defeated the Nazis.
        1. OTTO
          OTTO 11 May 2013 09: 09 New
          0
          Quote: krokodil25
          They are still trying to claim that they defeated the Nazis.

          What else can they do?
        2. family
          family tree 11 May 2013 09: 17 New
          +7
          Quote: krokodil25
          Hello everyone! They are still trying to claim that they defeated the Nazis.

          Yes, they do not try, but declare, with 100% certainty, that it was so
          "The USA saved Russia from Hitler", Mark, USA:
          I was in Petersburg in 1997 and was shocked by the huge cold buildings. Stalinist style, do not you call it? Ugly. Seeing traces of bullet and bomb damage on the walls, I asked the guide where it came from. She said: "Traces of war" I was surprised: what war? I lived in London at one time, but there were no similar traces of destruction. What is happening in St. Petersburg? Maybe I overslept a history lesson? I asked for clarification. She confirmed that we are talking about the second world war. But this does not stand up to criticism - after 50 years, after the United States saved Russia from Hitler, they could not even clear the city

          “Without the US, the whole world would speak German”, Joseph John Rosengast (North Carolina, USA)
          We have to recall from history that millions of people did not want the United States to enter either World War II or the First. If we had not entered the First World War, then maybe everyone would speak German and there would be no democracy in the world ... As for the Second World War, while we waited, millions of people died in German camps and the Germans captured a large part of Europe.

          In general, the inter-ear ganglion in them is fully formatted and rebooted. hi
          1. VADIMKRSK
            VADIMKRSK 11 May 2013 10: 45 New
            +1
            Learning history is late. But they won’t come on foot ... They will set others up!
          2. Guun
            Guun 11 May 2013 20: 15 New
            +1
            It’s good that they underestimate us! Better to overestimate than underestimate and play. On the way of the Teutons, Napaleon, Hitler are the Western shit, in the end the result, as always, is not in their favor.
        3. slvevg
          slvevg 11 May 2013 09: 29 New
          +5
          believe me, they are not trying, they have already nurtured a generation. who is sure of it. I spoke on this subject with my nephew, studying in Italy. He says that Italy, in alliance with America, defeated Germany and the USSR. It turns out WE brought the world two plague-fascism and communism! angry
        4. nickname 1 and 2
          nickname 1 and 2 11 May 2013 10: 17 New
          +3
          Quote: krokodil25
          They are still trying to claim that they defeated the Nazis.


          The dog barks and the caravan goes!

          Caught in a hunting pit - fox, wolf and bear. And the hunter went into a binge. They are sitting in a pit, a beast, they are sitting, but it’s hunting.
          Here the fox says: "Let's eat someone so as not to die for everyone!"
          Wolf: "come on. And whom?"
          Lisa: "Well, the youngest. I'm 10 years old. And you?"
          Wolf: "I'm 5 years old"
          Bear: "I’m only 1 year old, but as I give, the appetite will disappear!"

          Our fathers and grandfathers and great-grandfathers explained to the world = DO NOT OPEN FOR ANOTHER CARAWAY! LADIES, AND APPETITE WILL DROP!


          GLORY TO RUSSIA! HAPPY GREAT VICTORY! drinks
        5. Ruslan_F38
          Ruslan_F38 11 May 2013 11: 31 New
          +1
          The United States and England not only believe that they are the victors of fascism, they decided that the whole world should live by their rules and that they can dictate the rules of the game to the whole world. The recognition of the fact of our victory is impossible for them, in principle, that in the Great Patriotic War, and in any other, this undermines their pseudo "authority". It is annoying that they are washing the brains of their youth from the cradle and she firmly believes that the United States and England defeated the war, and the USSR only helped.
      2. Canep
        Canep 11 May 2013 08: 48 New
        +3
        in the West, as you know, celebrate the end of May 8, when the German command signed the surrender to them without our participation

        The act was signed May 8 with our participationbut when they signed we already had the 9th.
        May 8 at 22:43 CET [9] (at 00:43, May 9 Moscow time)

        And without us they signed on the 7th in Reims (more precisely, in the presence of our representative Susloparov).
      3. Alexander
        Alexander 11 May 2013 08: 53 New
        +1
        The article is complete bullshit. If Stalin had signed a peace treaty with Hitler (There was no such proposal because they tried to sign a peace treaty with the countries of the Allies. And in those days they were allies to us.), Then the people would not have understood it. These tv * ri ruined millions of lives throughout Europe and so easily want to get rid of !?

        PS The peace treaty tried to be signed not by Goebels, but by General Krebs.
      4. avt
        avt 11 May 2013 09: 59 New
        +2
        Quote: Prokop
        If Stalin hadn’t forced Keitel to re-sign the act of unconditional surrender, it seems to me that the Americans and the British would later argue that their victory and not our achievement (as in the First World War) and would justify it legally.

        good YES ! It was a visionary political move for the future. It is TO ACCEPT CAPITULATION, and not be present, as was done earlier, in the form of one of the parties with the signature of a simple representative on the protocol. Not for nothing that the amers arranged a magnificent signing in Japan with a rather faded representation of the allies. They clearly showed that this was their victory.
    2. astra
      astra 11 May 2013 13: 43 New
      +4
      Stalin showed that it would be more expensive to break the contract and the West was afraid of Stalin, which can’t be said about Gorbachev, Yeltsin was promised that after the withdrawal of our troops from the GDR, NATO would not advance to the East, the result is known. Unfortunately, with our weak power, the West is still impudent and our authorities are still inferior.
  2. vilenich
    vilenich 11 May 2013 07: 22 New
    +5
    Article +, but especially liked the phrase:
    “If anything, you will be the next here. Look: this is how you sign your future unconditional surrender in the suburbs taken by storm of London and Washington. And there will be no intermediate decisions, truces, concessions ”
  3. treskoed
    treskoed 11 May 2013 07: 42 New
    +4
    Firmness and integrity, which was then often lacking in our foreign policy!
  4. kmike
    kmike 11 May 2013 07: 46 New
    +6
    In 1945, the Soviet army was the strongest, and as the strongest we could dictate our terms. There will still be a time when 1945 will repeat itself!
    1. OTTO
      OTTO 11 May 2013 08: 44 New
      +2
      Quote: kmike
      Another time will come when the year 1945 will be repeated!

      I'm afraid now a more likely repeat of 1941
      1. Hudo
        Hudo 11 May 2013 10: 09 New
        +1
        Quote: OTTO
        Quote: kmike
        Another time will come when the year 1945 will be repeated!

        I'm afraid now a more likely repeat of 1941


        After 1941, it will be 1945.
        1. OTTO
          OTTO 11 May 2013 12: 43 New
          +1
          Quote: Hudo
          Quote: OTTO
          Quote: kmike
          Another time will come when the year 1945 will be repeated!

          I'm afraid now a more likely repeat of 1941


          After 1941, it will be 1945.

          This is certainly true !!! Only not everyone who started the war in the 41st reached the 45th!
  5. horoh
    horoh 11 May 2013 07: 49 New
    +2
    Great article, read with pleasure.
  6. Egen
    Egen 11 May 2013 07: 55 New
    +1
    In alternative fiction, at least 100 times, it all went through, and on the forums there were countless numbers.
    "that is, to enter the war with the USSR"
    There is logic in this and in the fact that, in general, war is the expression of politics by other means, and politics, in turn, is economics, so we need to compare not the current number of troops in the theater of war, but the capabilities of the economies of the countries. For example, was there anything to oppose to the bombing armada and aircraft carriers as in England.
    Well, and another political moment - the future US president was also far from stupid and not just a soldier, many of his orders, regarding interactions with the USSR troops, speak about this - there was a recent article on the forum here. So, under those conditions, no one had any other alternative.
  7. Ragnarek
    Ragnarek 11 May 2013 08: 01 New
    +1
    Well, the article is not without meaning. perhaps a demonstration of the capabilities of the USSR before the "allies" also had a place to be
  8. Tartary
    Tartary 11 May 2013 08: 05 New
    +4
    Quote: svp67
    Well, well, there is logic in this. "+"

    I agree ...
    Following the logic (of course, sitting in the kitchen), based on the situation in Syria and relying on ever-growing popular patriotism (which is facilitated by events such as the recent Military Parade on a significant date), the Russian leadership should have shown historical parallels to potential "friends", drawing on the facts referred to in the article ...

    Suddenly, for some reason, I think that the parallels on the sidelines of whoever needs to be drawn (!), That politicians of different calibers came to Moscow during this period of time, and Putin’s message to the Netanyahs, and the Anglo-Saxons changed their opinions on Syria, and a swift “march” -throw "A. Merkel to Afghanistan - all these are links in one chain, which Russian politicians have forged for today ...
    How long is this chain? How many links are still forged? And what thickness will be the following - we don’t know ... But, from the kitchen window, through the veil of the scattering fog, it is clear that the ice drift does begin ...
    Or did the windows fog up?
    1. Egen
      Egen 11 May 2013 11: 55 New
      +1
      Quote: Tartary
      it’s clear that the ice drift does begin ...

      Someone long begins: ((((
      1. Tartary
        Tartary 11 May 2013 13: 29 New
        +1
        Quote: Egen
        Someone long begins: ((((

        What can I do? Show the ice - I will push! Give a machine gun - I will shoot!

        It turned out straight by the classics of the genre - I can dig! What else can you do? I can not dig ... lol
    2. Akhtuba73
      Akhtuba73 11 May 2013 23: 47 New
      +1
      This is precisely the brain-bothering thing that haunts me. So many events in the world, not a small part of them are connected with Russia, everything is rapidly happening ... Our country plays a small role in this carousel. It is not enough to think about the layouts and fantasize for the future. And so I want to clarify everything! Life will show. If more advanced experts will enlighten, I will say thanks
  9. pinecone
    pinecone 11 May 2013 08: 10 New
    +3
    Explicit search. By the way, no "peace treaty" between the USSR and Germany in 1939. did not have. Two agreements were signed: the first on non-aggression (23.08.39), the second on friendship and borders (28.09.39).
    It is curious that the non-aggression pact during the time of the damned perestroika was apt to be called a "pact", so that it could sound more terrible and more revealing. To Stalin, of course. It seems like some kind of conspiracy, something ferocious. About the agreement on friendship and borders they were silent, as they are silent now.
  10. Gamal
    Gamal 11 May 2013 08: 22 New
    +5
    Anyone who is plotting against Russia something unkind will end up waiting for this ...
    1. Hudo
      Hudo 11 May 2013 10: 14 New
      +2
      Quote: Gamal
      Anyone who is plotting against Russia something unkind will end up waiting for this ...


      Better this
  11. fenix57
    fenix57 11 May 2013 08: 27 New
    +3
    "[i] But the USSR didn’t take revenge on Germany then - it showed exactly WHAT will happen to everyone who ..." [/i] - after all, we are not vengeful, but we should not "do dirty tricks" against Russia. Indeed, HISTORY has shown that "to those who come to us with a sword, they will die from it" - this is AXIOM! AND ABOUT THIS Anglo-Saxons NEED TO REMEMBER! hi
  12. vjatsergey
    vjatsergey 11 May 2013 08: 30 New
    +1
    plus an article, today we lack the strength of decisions.
  13. HAIFISCH
    HAIFISCH 11 May 2013 08: 37 New
    +3
    here will be fatter than the chances laughing
    1. APASUS
      APASUS 11 May 2013 10: 30 New
      +2
      Here it is, their PARADE OF VICTORY !!!
  14. Gamal
    Gamal 11 May 2013 08: 49 New
    +4
    Quote: HAIFISCH
    here will be fatter than the chances laughing


    From all sides a rod, surround what? smile In short, instead of the phrase "the ring of enemies is compressed around Russia, it should be read" the ring of enemies is compressed at the sight of Russia " smile
  15. Komsomolets
    Komsomolets 11 May 2013 09: 17 New
    +3
    Just a wonderful article !!! A huge plus.
    It was then that the Anglo-Saxons realized that they would never succeed in defeating Russia by force.
    And they embarked on a long process of our decomposition. But they won’t succeed either, they’ll decompose themselves faster.
  16. erased
    erased 11 May 2013 09: 19 New
    +6
    The victory in that war was won by the USSR. And the States won the war. Because they did not suffer very heavy losses and did not fight on their land, they received a huge profit both from the point of view of finance and from the point of view of politics, becoming a world leader on a par with the USSR.
    But since then, they and their singers only scared the USSR with war, but did not cross the line. And only after the collapse of the USSR did they go on the offensive. And now they go further. BUT with an eye.
    The fact that they bought up the entire bureaucratic apparatus of the Russian Federation, fed the power, still does not give them a full guarantee of victory, and even with little blood. That's why they jump at the border, waging an informational, political war, but not using force.
    How many more will they jump like that? It already depends not only on them, but also on us.
  17. shinobi
    shinobi 11 May 2013 09: 33 New
    +5
    Here it is the simplest, most logically justified explanation of why the West is trying to rewrite history and ruin Russia by all means. Russia is the only state at the moment capable of overthrowing the United States alone, fighting the whole world and defeating. Yes, the losses will be appalling, but the fact that we can do it already 70 years makes the west see nightmares in its dreams of world domination. Therefore, Russia will never have real friends except the Army, Navy and Air Force.
    1. VADIMKRSK
      VADIMKRSK 11 May 2013 11: 04 New
      -1
      Russia had no friends, the fleet killed officers, the army too. Who prompted? Or this massacre happened by itself ...
  18. fenix57
    fenix57 11 May 2013 10: 09 New
    +1
    Quote: Tartary
    Following the logic (of course, sitting in the kitchen)

    So we all sort of "sit in the kitchens". Ali You are not .... In the box ....
    Quote: Tartary
    that arrivals in Moscow during this period of time of politicians of different caliber

    So after all, to them, who arrived(this is Kerry apparently) they wanted to "flirt" under Russia, so this is only a plus for Russia ... hi
  19. sichevik
    sichevik 11 May 2013 10: 21 New
    +3
    Even if they rewrite history in the West, you won’t throw words out of a song !!! There was a Great Victory, the Act of unconditional surrender was signed, and they have not disappeared and will not disappear.
    And let this be a visual lesson for everyone.
    I.V. Stalin was a very far-sighted and wise man. All provided.
  20. Prosto vovochka
    Prosto vovochka 11 May 2013 11: 11 New
    +5
    Now Russia is not even able to restrain its vassals. Constantly looking to the west, and to the west in FIG. He decides his selfish affairs without any regard for anyone. Putin is not Stalin, unfortunately. Russia has, if not the most powerful nuclear potential, then one of two equal. Russia is a self-sufficient country, it produces everything from a needle to space complexes, Russia is able to not trade with the world and live in abundance, Russia does not need to look to the west. But unfortunately, Russia does not have a leadership capable of independent action. But nevertheless, let Putin be better than ebn (with a small print intentionally). Russia is obliged to restore the empire, only the principles of managing the national suburbs should change dramatically. NO NATIONAL HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGED BY REGIONS. And further. It is necessary, using the experience of Mossad, to return everyone’s beloved first president of the USSR to their native country and onwards ... and never look back to the west.
  21. DAGESTAN333
    DAGESTAN333 11 May 2013 11: 27 New
    +4
    Allies Anglo-Saxons? Are these allies who chose not to notice the capture of Poland, the capture of France? Where were they when we felt bad near Moscow and Stalingrad ??? They referred to the unpreparedness)))) ... and when they gave them a pundel under the Ardennes, we were prepared to hastily organize our attack on the Germans in order to distract us ..? God forbid, from such allies! Everyone has long understood (although they continue to smile) which Anglo-Saxon allies ...
  22. deman73
    deman73 11 May 2013 16: 26 New
    +2
    Stalin was a smart ruler who could foresee and who thought about the future of his country of his people, not like the current pugs seized power in order to steal
    1. Egen
      Egen 13 May 2013 05: 49 New
      0
      Quote: deman73
      who thought about the future of his country of his people


      - this is the key phrase, because Now in the first place is not ideology or principles, but money!
  23. The comment was deleted.
  24. Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 11 May 2013 18: 38 New
    -2
    During the years of World War II, the US industry produced:

    - 287 000 aircraft - this is more than the USSR and the Third Reich combined;

    - More than 200 thousand units of armored vehicles (more than the USSR and the Third Reich combined);

    - 5 million trucks and cars. For comparison: production of trucks of the USSR during the war ~ 152 000 pcs. (30 times smaller!). At the same time, any Studebaker is simply ashamed to compare with the domestic “one and a half” (obsolete Ford 1929 model of the year). The quality of American cars is legendary.

    - US Navy daily received 2 combat and 3 civilian ships (only large combat units are considered - aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, transports and tankers. Torpedo boats, etc. "trifle" - does not count);
    Qualitatively, the US Navy was superior to any of the ships of the USSR, Germany, Great Britain or Japan. That only battleships like "Iowa" or 175 destroyers like "Fletcher" are standing. Masterpieces of shipbuilding.

    - radar, analog computers, fire control systems - the Americans had no equal in this (tags for the search engine: Mk.53, Mk.37, Mk.14, Mk.51, Mk.I fire control computer, etc.)

    - Manhattan project. Together with the B-29 bombers, this was a very serious argument in any conflict (however, 1000 "Super Fortresses" could do without nuclear weapons).

    In the 1945 year, the USA had a “pumped up” industry, a huge mobilization resource (during the war, the US population increased by tens of millions), advanced science (K-14 gyroscopic sights, aircraft anti-overload suits - even the “advanced” Third Reich did not know such things ) And as always, the loyal US ally is the British Empire. Unsinkable aircraft carrier off the coast of Europe with its industry, army and bases in all corners of the earth (India, Australia, Canal, etc.)

    It would be a war in which the Soviet Union had no chance.

    Ask yourself honestly: what could the USSR oppose this power? Thousands of aircraft and tanks? Amers at that time had ten times more equipment. Desperate Russian courage? This is a bad plan - Americans knew more abruptly (kamikaze). They knew and broke like an old broom about a knee.

    An honest man will inevitably have a question: If America was so cool, why didn’t the Yankees attack the USSR?

    The answer is obvious - nobody needed it. In a couple of months, Amer could defeat Soviet oil mines and oil refineries (Ploiesti, Baku - within the radius of defeat of B-17 and B-29). To put the Soviet army in the situation of the summer of 1941 of the year (panic, retreat, demoralization), to destroy Soviet statehood. But then what? What is the benefit of the whole circus? The amers did not have a shortage of resources - and nobody needed naked Siberia (gas and oil were found only 30 years later).

    Build B-24 Liberator at the Willow Run Plant. The pace of production is one four-engine bomber per hour. Total release - 18 000 machines
    1. Ulysses
      Ulysses 11 May 2013 18: 54 New
      +3
      Beauties.
      Only they did not win a single major military operation against a serious enemy (away from the coast, without sweeping away all the support of large warships and advantages in the air).
      The Arden operation of the Germans is proof of this.
      1. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 11 May 2013 19: 42 New
        -3
        Quote: Ulysses
        Only a single major military operation against a serious enemy (away from the coast, without sweeping away all the support of large warships and advantages in the air)

        Yes, the amers preferred to throw bombs and 406 mm shells at the enemy, rather than the corpses of their draftees

        Not the worst tactic
        Quote: Ulysses
        The Arden operation of the Germans is proof of this.

        What exactly confuses you in these events?
    2. GELEZNII_KAPUT
      GELEZNII_KAPUT 11 May 2013 19: 21 New
      +2
      May I have a stupid question? Was the experience of the US Army great? Or does he mean nothing?
      1. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 11 May 2013 19: 37 New
        0
        Quote: GELEZNII_KAPUT
        Was the experience of the US Army great?

        For the first time, the United States entered the war against the Third Reich on November 8 of the 1942 of the year - on this day the expeditionary force of the US Army, numbering 70 thousand, landed on the North African coast.

        80 large-scale landing operations in Europe and the Pacific theater of operations

        daily (day and night) raids of thousands of strategic bombers (this is what kind of coordination of actions - shock machines, an escort of thousands of Mustangs. at the same time, the losses in each departure were only a few%)

        There is nothing to even say about the sea, there were no equal to the Amers - more than 700 German submarines in the Atlantic were drowned. And in the Pacific Ocean - the entire Imperial Navy of Japan. (kamikaze, banzai attacks - nothing helped, flattened. The ratio of casualties of the armed forces of the US and Japan is 1: 9. Shame on Japanese warriors.)

        So the Americans had experience. Believe me, there were no fools either.
        + Absolute superiority in technology and resources

        US Landing Operations and Land Battles in the Pacific Theater
        1. GELEZNII_KAPUT
          GELEZNII_KAPUT 12 May 2013 09: 26 New
          0
          Germany at the time of the US landing in Africa was more concerned about the eastern front, and Africa was secondary to them, respectively, and the supply of troops was mediocre, and indeed the scale of the battles of the eastern and African front was incorrect to compare, the United States lost 20000 people for the entire African company, and the USSR only in Stalingrad lost 1250000 people ... not convinced! And Japan is bogged down on the continent ... in short for both cases, I can say that it is impossible to give equal attention to several issues, there is always a priority ... they are not rubber resources. hi
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 12 May 2013 13: 56 New
            -2
            Quote: GELEZNII_KAPUT
            and indeed the scale of the battles of the eastern and African front is incorrect to compare

            yes, it is, sandbox, warm-up.
            the main for the United States was the Pacific theater of operations
            Quote: GELEZNII_KAPUT
            The USA lost 20000 people for the entire African company, and the USSR only lost 1250000 people in Stalingrad

            losses are not an indicator of great military experience

            USA lost in the Pacific 200 000. Japan ~ 1 900 000. Which of them was more experienced? Who was stronger prepared and fought better?
            Quote: GELEZNII_KAPUT
            And Japan is bogged down on the continent

            Was there a lot of fighting in the continental part of China? (since 1941)
            A non-aggression pact was signed with the USSR (April 13 1941)
        2. Egen
          Egen 13 May 2013 05: 55 New
          0
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          So the Americans had experience. Believe me, there were no fools either.

          IMHO, the American approach to military action is just another. They are accustomed to doing everything "safely" on the islands - throwing 16dm shells and then collecting corpses. Probably, having received in the face in the landing landings, at least someone will choose such tactics. And now we see the continuation of this policy - everything from a safe distance and by the wrong hands. Well, then, in Europe, it would have been hand-to-hand. Despite the heroism of paratroopers and others, IMHO Ardennes showed that Americans and Germans can fight more with airplanes, rather than 1 on 1. And Russian Germans were always beaten in general ...
    3. sichevik
      sichevik 11 May 2013 22: 39 New
      +1
      Amer could ... Amer not only could, but really wanted to destroy the Soviet Union. Yes, only their gut was thin then. And not only then, but always.
      Amer only can fight either with a weaker opponent, or having a multiple advantage in technology and manpower.
      If they were so powerful and mighty then why did they fight with Japan for so long? And in the end, the millionth Kwantung Army was defeated in a few weeks by the Soviet Army? And you vaunted American army for several years unsuccessfully fought with the Japanese.
      As soon as they first had nuclear weapons, they immediately began to develop plans for bombing Soviet cities. And only the creation of the Soviet atomic bomb, and soon the hydrogen bomb stopped them. This is to that. that they did not need to attack the USSR.
      1. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 12 May 2013 00: 47 New
        0
        Quote: sichevik
        Amer can only fight either with a weaker opponent

        Hat, more caps!
        Quote: sichevik
        or having multiple advantages in technology and manpower.

        Who is to blame for the fact that the US Army is equipped with the latest technology
        Maybe they should abandon the Tomahawk SLCM, get the P-47 Tanderbolt from the museum and "fight honestly"?))
        Quote: sichevik
        If they were so powerful and mighty then why did they fight with Japan for so long?

        Amer defeats the Japanese with a score of 9: 1
        At one time, the Japanese shot the 2 Pacific Squadron with the 30: 0 score in the Tsushima Strait

        A born nation of fishermen and sailors is an extremely dangerous adversary at sea. Japan had the second strongest fleet in the world for 1941 year, Fidelity to the fatherland and inhuman self-sacrifice (Kamikaze phenomenon). Nothing helped - America tore Japan up like an old rag
        Quote: sichevik
        And in the end, the millionth Kwantung Army was defeated in a few weeks by the Soviet Army?

        The 1945 Kwantung Army of the year was a non-operational assembly of Japanese reservists and Mongolian mercenaries from Manzhou Guo
        Not a single Japanese plane took to the sky, and the only tank battle took place on Sakhalin. The "formidable" Kwantung Army, in fact, had neither modern weapons, nor fuel, nor training - all this died in the Pacific Ocean during 4 years of military operations.

        The most interesting thing is that the "formidable" Kwantung Army advanced in advance towards Korea - because the Red Army advanced in Manchuria with almost no resistance (sanitary losses from illnesses, sunstrokes and accidents when handling equipment).
        Quote: sichevik
        This is to that. that they did not need to attack the USSR.

        The absolutely correct conclusion. The illustration shows the highway to San Diego (California), 1946 year. Nafig Americans did not give up Siberia and another bloody mess without any meaning.
        What benefit could America have given a blow to the USSR in 1946? No!
        1. Egen
          Egen 13 May 2013 07: 52 New
          0
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          A born nation of fishermen and sailors is an extremely dangerous adversary at sea.

          But I don’t completely agree with this :) But what about their self-isolation? :) For some reason, the Spanish-Portuguese made geographical discoveries and discovered the same Japanese, but they did not sail to Europe :)
          Seriously, for fun - no one will tell you a link on this subject to improve education? :)
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 14 May 2013 00: 33 New
            0
            Quote: Egen
            But I don’t completely agree with this :) But what about their self-isolation?

            8 July 1853 in the bay of Uraga near the city of Edo anchored the squadron of commander Matthew Perry - American ships forced to sign a trade agreement under the threat of execution of Japanese cities. Japan's 200-year self-isolation has ended. Intensive industrialization began.

            Over the next 50 years, a monster has grown from Japan, a real contender for dominance in the Pacific.
            Quote: Egen
            Seriously, for fun - no one will tell you a link on this subject to improve education?

            http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B9%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D

            0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0_%C2%AB%D0%9D%D

            0%B0%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%C2%BB

            Super battleships "Nagato" surprised even the British sea wolves. Europeans and Americans are worried ...

            Engraving of Perry's visit
            1. Egen
              Egen 14 May 2013 05: 49 New
              0
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              Over the next 50 years, a monster has grown from Japan, a real contender for dominance in the Pacific

              Yes, no, Oleg, thanks for the link, about the new story from Port Arthur to Yamato, this is understandable,

              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              Japan's 200 Summer Self-Isolation Ends

              - I meant what happened before, because All that I read about Japan since the time of the Mongols, it never differed by its fleet ...
              1. Santa Fe
                Santa Fe 14 May 2013 16: 52 New
                0
                Quote: Egen
                I meant what happened before, because All that I read about Japan since the time of the Mongols, it never differed by its fleet ...

                I honestly can’t help with anything

                the only thing that is obvious is that Japanese culture is saturated with the sea. Understanding that the sea is everything for island Japan.
                at the same time, the “rich traditions” in managing sailing brigantines (which, it seems, Japan did not have) are hardly so important nowadays. To control Nagato, not so much ancient traditions are needed, but modern KNOWLEDGE. And they, apparently, the Japanese had - the ships of the Imperial Navy turned out to be excellent, and they knew how to fight japas - do not put a finger in their mouth)))

                Settings "Nagato" after a blast on the Bikini Atoll. Battleship turned out to be stronger than nuclear fire
        2. Egen
          Egen 13 May 2013 08: 47 New
          0
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          The absolutely correct conclusion. The illustration shows the highway to San Diego (California), 1946 year. Siberians and another bloody mess didn’t give up to the Americans without any sense. What benefit could America give to the Soviet Union in the 1946 year? No!

          San Diego is a good town; aircraft carriers still loom on the roads. But at the beginning there was the only fleet base at the Pacific Fleet, even before Hawaii. Therefore, it is clear the city was comfortable :)
          IMHO politicians in the United States, the meaning of the war with the USSR was, and the owners of military factories, too. But Russians were brothers in arms to ordinary Americans, and they are ours too, and there were no modern political technologies to make friends enemies, and even before their president probably depended more on the people ...
          1. postman
            postman 13 May 2013 22: 08 New
            0
            Quote: Egen
            IMHO politicians in the United States, the meaning of the war with the USSR was,

            WHAT?
            Almost what?
            "Experience" was already
            Sayers M., Kahn AE The Great Conspiracy. The Secret War against Soviet Russia. - Boston [USA, MA]: Brown & Co, 1946
            1. Santa Fe
              Santa Fe 14 May 2013 00: 34 New
              0
              Quote: Postman
              Sayers M., Kahn AE The Great Conspiracy. The Secret War against Soviet Russia. - Boston [USA, MA]: Brown & Co, 1946

              I hardly ever have the strength to read it ... but it looks convincing
              1. postman
                postman 14 May 2013 14: 47 New
                0
                Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                I hardly ever have the strength to read it ... but it looks convincing

                Military Publishing House from 1992 (if I am not mistaken), is in RUSSIAN.
                If you trust, go ahead.
                REMEMBER ONLY about the "Fulton" speech, and the "article" after 100 grams:
                Russian television 9 May 2013 of the year disgraced Russia
                SURPRISING THE PHRASES IS VERY EASY, ESPECIALLY WITH TRANSLATION
            2. Egen
              Egen 14 May 2013 06: 28 New
              0
              Quote: Postman
              Almost what?

              IMHO:
              1) The capitalists are still against the communists. But the anti-communist sentiment in the United States has not disappeared. They quieted down during the war, but then again. This is confirmed by the following facts: the same science fiction writer Heinlein, although he was a type of socialist, was against the communists; and the ensuing Cold War. They scolded the American people - although they were like brothers in arms, memoirs and a newsreel of meetings of convoys and on the Elbe, they quickly forgot their friendship.
              2) The Americans also understood quite well the further strategic prospects of relations with the USSR, which would inevitably lead to confrontation. Starting with the theory of the opposition of two systems. And prepared in advance - Dulles negotiations, the atomic bomb (not against Japan seriously), etc. Surely they knew about work on nuclear weapons in the USSR, as well as the pace of development of our defense industry. Therefore, they simply had to figure out that over time, at the existing rate of increase in the quantity and quality of armaments, the USSR would catch up with them, so that their advantage would decrease. Moreover, fairly developed countries like Czechoslovakia and Poland are connected to the USSR.
              It is clear, for example, the IS-3 was a surprise to the allies at the parade, but I do not believe that they did not predict such a development at the top.
              In general, everything is simple - based on computer strategies like Heroes - who has more resources and who is the first :) There weren’t such games in the war, everything is on your fingers ...
              1. postman
                postman 14 May 2013 16: 13 New
                0
                Quote: Egen
                1) The capitalists are still against the communists

                And the Communists for the capitalists?
                L'International
                The whole world of violence we will destroy
                To the ground, and then
                We are ours, we will build a new world

                IMHO: and who first started?
                On April 30, 1919, ten hostages were shot in the back in the courtyard of the Luitpold gymnasium in Munich, including one woman, and their bodies were mutilated beyond recognition and carried away. This crime was carried out by order of the communist terrorist Eglhofer and under the responsibility Soviet Jewish commissars Levin, Levien-Nissen and Axelrod. In 1919, twenty hostages were killed in Budapest under the Bolshevik regime of a Jew, Bela Kun (real name is Aron Kon). During the October Revolution in Spain, eight prisoners were shot in Oviedo, seventeen in Turon, and in the Pelano barracks, thirty-eight prisoners were put at the head of the rebels to cover the communist attack, some of whom were shot. At the Congress of the Comintern on July 31, 1935, the communist leader Carcio openly declared that this revolution was being carried out "under communist leadership".

                Martyr John (I.A. Emelyanov), monk; Shot in 1937:
                I believe that the Soviet government-is the power of the Antichrist and sent to the people in punishment

                The CPSU program argued that the main content of anti-communism was "... slander of the socialist system, falsification of the political goals of the communist parties, the teachings of Marxism-Leninism" (1961).
                (It’s not even funny to read this)
                Quote: Egen
                the same mentioned Heinlein science fiction though

                He is a rational person. Like Luis Alberto Corvalan Lepe (Comrade Lucho)

                Quote: Egen
                Battered American people

                Tell me please:
                - at least ONE country that voluntarily came (to communism) or (of those that are forcibly) remained in "socialism" (communism)?
                Chur Kubu and North Korea do not lead (it's just a matter of time)
                -Political refugees from wolf capitalism, to us, to the east (a bearded homeless person and a felon Angel should not be brought)?


                Quote: Egen
                The Americans also understood quite well the further strategic prospects of relations with the USSR that this would inevitably lead to confrontation.

                And how should it be in reality? All that comes from the USSR truth for the good of America?
                Do you seriously believe that we are God's chosen people and that ONLY we bring goodness and correctness to the world?
                Two strong powers with ambition.
                Naturally they feared, were troubled, and prepared. Speech in Fulton about this just.
              2. postman
                postman 14 May 2013 16: 14 New
                0
                Quote: Egen
                Battered American people

                And TO THOSE (in their own country, and even voluntarily) NEED?
                (except masochists of course /)

                The Chekist Jew Bela Kun (1871) conducted an experiment that could compete with the Paris Commune in regard to the amount of blood spilled, ordering the execution of 60-70 thousand people in Crimea. These executions were carried out mainly from machine guns. In the city hospital of Alupka, 272 patients and wounded were taken to the gates of the institution on a stretcher and shot. This case was officially confirmed in a report submitted to the Geneva Committee of the Red Cross. In 133 days of the rampant terror that he set up, Jew Bela Kun exterminated countless people. The names of 570 of them were given in official documents.
                In November 1934, Chinese Marshal Chai-Kan-Shi unveiled information that in the Chiangxi province, the Communists killed one million people and took all their property from six million.

                According to data provided by the USSR itself, and taking into account reliable sources, the number of executions in the first five years of Soviet power is approximately 1 million 860 thousand people, of which: 6.000 teachers, 8.800 doctors, 54 thousand officers, 260 thousand soldiers, 105 thousand police officers, 49 thousand gendarmes, 12.800 officials , 355 thousand representatives of the aristocracy, 192 thousand workers, 815 thousand peasants.

                According to Soviet statistics, Oganovsky, the number of deaths from starvation in 1921-1922 is 5 million 200 thousand people. The Austrian cardinal-archbishop, Monsignor Innitzer, in his July 1934 appeal said that millions of people were starving to death in the Soviet Union. During a speech delivered in front of the House of Lords on July 25, 1934, the Archbishop of Canterbury, speaking of reports regarding starvation in Soviet Russia in 1933, said that their number ranged from three to six million.
                1. Egen
                  Egen 15 May 2013 06: 44 New
                  0
                  Vasily, everything is clear, but I just answered the question - did it make sense to immediately start a war between the USA and the USSR, expressed my opinion that it was strategically, but the political and propaganda preparations took time, which was lost, and that’s all: ) And you delved into another question :)
                  Quote: Postman
                  Do you seriously believe that we are God's chosen people

                  Are you even me (maybe alas :)) close not a Jew :)))
    4. postman
      postman 13 May 2013 22: 01 New
      0
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      During the years of World War II, the US industry produced:

      Oleg. You are not talking about that. He brought everything into Tsifir.
      The author is pushing / puffing to prove something else.
      CRIME AND PUNISHMENT. Hu from the judge (who is given the right). Whose True Brother?
      US (RUSSIM / USSR) is given the right to PUNISH AND Pardon, we are the BEST, all other feces, subhuman.
      1. The author, and who the "thunderous applause" - well, would not be dishonored. 90% lies and no knowledge of History (sales I don’t know what to call: nubie? Deer?) fool
      Quote: Author
      But then the USSR did not take revenge on Germany - it showed exactly what will happen to everyone who ...


      2. The theme of betrayal, hmm ... we must recall the USSR-Germany treaty and appendixes to it.
      / Churchill reasonably remarked on the nagging of Stalin and Co. in 1941 (give the 2nd front, guard): but when we fought alone against Germany, you (Molotov in Berlin) at that time shared the British Empire with Ribentrop (Hitler), do not panic, we stood and stand you. /
      3. The English and Americans complied with all the conditions of the Yalta agreements (we do not:
      "fair elections" in Poland, Vienna, Berlin, etc.)
      4. About the Caribbean (Cuban) crisis, generally nonsense.
      Simply put, the point was played by Khrushchev and the Politburo)
      ================================================== ====
      Puff, puff, puff, hang noodles, but the fact (FACT)
      Forgotten Soldiers of the Great War - the state (country) still does not want to find and bury its defenders
      Where did the disabled veterans go?

      They were collected in one night - loaded into wagons and taken to "closed-type boarding houses with a special regime." Secretly at night so that there is no noise.
      [i] "... the beggars refuse to send them to the homes of the disabled ... arbitrarily leave them and continue to beggars. I propose transforming homes for the disabled and elderly into closed-type homes with a special regime. ” Document No. 06778. Report of the Minister of the Ministry of Internal Affairs Kruglov on February 20, 1954. [/I]
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 13 May 2013 22: 07 New
        0
        Quote: Postman
        About the Caribbean (Cuban) crisis, generally nonsense.
        Simply put, the point was played by Khrushchev and the Politburo)

        Yah? Rather, they had it iron.
        They forced the Americans to remove nuclear missiles from Turkey, balancing on the verge of a full third world
        1. postman
          postman 14 May 2013 13: 39 New
          0
          Quote: Spade
          They forced the Americans to remove nuclear missiles from Turkey, balancing on the verge of a full third world

          Do not believe myths. The graphs show everything:

          http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/US_nuclear_warheads_1945-2002
          _graph.png

          http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/USSR_nuclear_warheads_1949-20
          02.png

          1961 g Turkey accommodation 15 missiles medium-range PGM-19 Jupiter
          [i] Range: 2400 km
          Accuracy (CVO): 1,5 km
          Warhead type: monoblock thermonuclear W49 - 1,44 Mt [/ i]
          Just not funny against:
          more than 1300 bombers (on the contrary, just keep silent) capable of delivering about 3000 nuclear weapons, 183 Atlas and Titan ruen ICBMs to the territory of the USSR (versus LOW-READY AND ROAD ICBMs R-7 and R-16) and 144 Polaris missiles in nine nuclear submarines of the George Washington and Ethene Allen type(flight time, range are the same, mobility, stealth, surprise are JUST NOT COMPARABLE)



          Quote: Spade
          They forced the Americans to remove nuclear missiles from Turkey,

          1. Martin-Marietta company received a contract for the production of Pershing-1A in the middle of 1967.
          [i] A total of 754 Pershing-1 and Pershing-1A missiles were manufactured, of which 180 were deployed in Europe. In the form of three battalions of the US Army and two regiments of the German Air Force. Each battalion had 36 mobile units. Due to the ban on possession of nuclear weapons in the German constitution, missile control was in the hands of the US Army [/I]
          2. On December 12, 1979, NATO decided to deploy 572 missiles in Europe: 108 "Pershing-2" and 464 land-based mobile missiles BGM-109G "Tomahawk".

          =============
          here I sit with a calculator and a map and decide
          15 against hundreds, Europe, against Turkey.
          So Americans deceived the Caribbean, there are no words to describe
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Lopatov
            Lopatov 14 May 2013 14: 03 New
            0
            So did the Americans remove the missiles from Turkey? Removed. Will you refute this?

            Why were ours so nervous about rockets in Turkey? Why are Americans so nervous about missiles in Cuba? It seems that besides them there was still a bunch of nuclear weapons.

            And it’s all about the magic phrase "flight time".
            1. postman
              postman 14 May 2013 14: 23 New
              0
              Quote: Spade
              So did the Americans remove the missiles from Turkey? Removed. Will you refute this?

              Of course not. IT IS A FACT. 15 (!) Missiles). I recommend reading the letters of Khrushchev, Answers Kennedy.
              WE ARE ALL SUCH A GREAT POWER (were then and no matter what is now). It was necessary to observe decency.
              In general, the story of 15 rockets is nonsense and the same opportunism of American woodpeckers with epaulettes (Taylor and Lemey), like ours.
              Read, very interesting (Kennedy was against it, maybe there was NO SENSE in them)
              LOOK AT THE FIGURE: 6000 charges versus 300 + total superiority in delivery vehicles
              (which "iron point"?)

              Quote: Spade
              Why were ours so nervous about rockets in Turkey?

              "And why did ours enter Afghanistan? / When changing .. I already forgot his last name /"
              The question is not for me. I think how bragging began (USSR, USA) from 1947, they could not stop.

              Strategically, with 144 polaris and 1300 bombers and 6000 nuclear weapons, it does not play any role.
              1. Turkey is an independent state (Recognized by the USSR)
              2. Turkey is a member of NATO since February 18, 1952
              Everything is legal.
              THE QUESTION ABOUT MISSILES SHOULD BE SOLVED WITH TURKEY (now Turkey cannot be forced to deploy missiles against Russia)

              Quote: Spade
              Why are Americans so nervous about missiles in Cuba?

              History of America.
              +
              The distance from Cuba to the USA at the narrowest point of the Strait of Florida - 180 km, to Haiti through the Windward Strait - 77 km, to Jamaica through the Strait of Colon - 140 km, to Mexico through the Yucatan Strait - 210 km.
              If on the Hanko Peninsula the Americans deployed missiles with nuclear warheads, I think we would be nervous no less.
              Quote: Spade
              It seems that besides them there was still a bunch of nuclear weapons.

              graphics look:
              1.Not been
              ICBM R-7 and R-16, not even funny
              Startegical aviation of the USSR of that period - makes you smile
              Nuclear submarines with ICBMs are the same in conception


              Quote: Spade
              And it’s all in the magic phrase “flying time”.

              Equally important is OPERATIONAL READINESS
              1. Santa Fe
                Santa Fe 14 May 2013 16: 38 New
                0
                Quote: Postman
                Distance from Cuba to the USA at the narrowest point of the Strait of Florida - 180 km

                On the concrete "cone" is the number 90 miles (probably American)
                if so - from Xu West Point to Cuba, only 145 km.

                This is tantamount to the United States supplying rockets in Estonia.
                1. postman
                  postman 14 May 2013 17: 45 New
                  +1
                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  On the concrete "cone" is the number 90 miles (probably American)

                  Seriously?
                  This is probably from the US recourse
                  Earth is spinning.
                  62-year-old American swimmer Diana Nyad was forced to abandon another attempt to become the first person in the world to swim from Cuba to Florida without a shark cage.

                  Jellyfish didn’t kiss her so sickly ...
                  This was the fourth attempt(since 1978 tormented) Diana Nyad overcome the distance of 166 km from Cuba to the United States. Nyad got on board the boat that accompanied her at 7:42 local time (11:42 GMT).

                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  This is tantamount to the United States supplying rockets in Estonia.

                  It is not even a peninsula. I TO CUBA (and this is known as an island) tried to "bring"
                  Hogland?
                  1. Thunderbolt
                    Thunderbolt 14 May 2013 18: 05 New
                    0
                    With a face like Diana Nyad, I think you can safely be without a cage. It is rather worth worrying about the mental state of the Sharks after meeting with a similar Naiad. laughing
                    1. postman
                      postman 14 May 2013 18: 17 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Thunderbolt
                      With a face like Diana Nyad

                      This is her jellyfish like that. Believe me. I experienced on myself.
                      Just eat one. He took down his glasses, nearly lost his eyes
                      500 meters ELE mastered to the coast.
                      Ice, ointments, temperature, chills, drowsiness.
                      In the morning I got up as if for a long time and stubbornly kicked our feet on the face.
                      the skin was corroded, strips up to 7 mm wide, 7-11 cm long (like scratches) ...

                      For 61 years, my aunt looks NOT BAD.






                      Nothing saves:
                      BEFORE

                      AFTER
      2. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 14 May 2013 00: 42 New
        0
        Quote: Postman
        Oleg. You are not talking about that. He brought everything into Tsifir.

        The plot of a possible war of the USSR vs USA is of interest not only to me))) however, the result is obvious there. as well as the complete meaninglessness of such an adventure.

        Amer could destroy the Soviet army and the Soviet state, but what to do with 150 million people? To control the territory is not enough strength and money. Total genocide of the local population? A complete utopia, more delusional than the ideas of racial superiority from Mustachioed. Profit? She is not. The need for war? There is no need for this.

        This is what I wanted to say.
        Quote: Postman
        US (RUSSIM / USSR) is given the right to PUNISH AND Pardon, we are the BEST, all other feces, subhuman.

        No favors! Only punish!
        Quote: Postman
        . The topic of betrayal, mdya ... it is necessary to recall the USSR-Germany treaty and appendixes to it.

        But what about the agreement of April 13 1941? USSR-Japan?
        On the basis of this pact, Japan tried to extend its agony, having bought off from the USSR the Kuril Islands and a bunch of various concessions, concessions, etc. (negotiations in the summer of 1945 were conducted by EMNIP by Lozino-Lozinsky).
        Quote: Postman
        Where did the disabled veterans go?

        She drowned (s)
        1. postman
          postman 14 May 2013 13: 43 New
          0
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          This is what I wanted to say.

          And I'm for what you said.
          But my thought was not about that.
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          But what about the agreement of April 13 1941? USSR-Japan?

          And I remember. THESE ARE OTHER (author and "talking heads") FORGOTTEN.
          I also remember the position of Ribentrop (separate contract of Germany of the USSR in 1942,1943, an attempt to persuade Hitler), I remember the message of the Japanese Foreign Ministry in 1943 in the German Foreign Ministry: the Russians are ready to start negotiations and we (the Japanese) will mediate

          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          drowned (s)

          Humor and cynicism are not appropriate here.
          SO HOMELAND TREATED WITH ITS DEFENDERS.
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 14 May 2013 16: 56 New
            +1
            Quote: Postman
            I remember the message of the Japanese Foreign Ministry 1943 in the German Foreign Ministry: the Russians are ready to start negotiations and we (the Japanese) will be intermediaries

            what is the point?
            Quote: Postman
            SO HOMELAND TREATED WITH ITS DEFENDERS.

            “Damned and killed” Victor Astafyev
            1. postman
              postman 14 May 2013 17: 58 New
              0
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              what is the point?

              It's all about the same: a separate world m / y Germany and the USSR, a return to the borders of 1939.
              You didn `t know?
              / Imagine how Japan was important, they are not fools, they knew what would happen after the defeat of Germany /
              And the "best" friend of the working people of Italy, Benito Mussolini?
              3 (!) Attempts to impose on Hitler his mediation in the negotiations between Berlin and Moscow (Adolf believed that BM was an inappropriate figure for this)

              And in the course, that the best "friend" of the USSR in the Third Reich was Dr. Goebels.
              Yes, yes, that same Goebels.
              from 1941 to 1944 REPEATED ATTEMPTS TO BEND Hitler to peace with the USSR (even general principles have been worked out)
              ====================================
              Better write an article about attempts by the USSR to make peace with Germany in 1941!
              (You will not find in our archives, tattoo: works of Allen Welsh Dulles, OSS archives)
      3. Egen
        Egen 14 May 2013 06: 36 New
        0
        Quote: Postman
        Oleg. You are not talking about that. He brought everything into Tsifir.

        Dear Vasily, here I will support Oleg: the tsifir is the only reliable thing (well, let's say that it is reliable :)), and everything else around is already like presenting and calculating this tsifir :)
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        The plot of a possible war of the USSR vs USA is of interest not only to me))) however, there the result is obvious

        Still :) I repeat, in recent years a lot of fiction has been written on this topic, if anyone does not know. But the result is not so obvious: the USSR would technically capture continental Europe,
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        as well as the complete meaninglessness of such an adventure.

        but this is another question:) ...
        1. postman
          postman 14 May 2013 13: 58 New
          0
          Quote: Egen
          here I will support Oleg:

          Hi. Yes, I do not mind, an amateur myself.
          It’s just that you and Oleg did not understand my idea.
          He is trying to refute the absurd (article)!
          I’m talking about something else, about the immorality of the article itself and the “postulates”, the “axioms” set forth in it, as well as the “childish” (I would say perverted) babble in comments.
          You just read / think:
          May 9 capitulated to the Soviet Union not only Germany, but the entire West
          1. Germany capitulated not only to the USSR, but to EVERYTHING! coalition (9, 8, or 2 is the tenth case)
          2.all the West?
          2.1. Hu from the whole West? (Switzerland, Luxembourg, Andora, Canada ???)
          2.2. When did they “capitulate” and after what war? She was? USSR- WEST?
          2.3. Let the author read how Churchill was pulling Hayk: take part of the Russian zone of occupation, this will give us some leverage in the position in Austria (not to drive the Russians out of there), in Berlin, in Poland, and how Churchill was sent away.

          EVERYTHING IS EXHAUSTED from the finger, like a legend about Churchill's Fulton speech.
          (I advise you to read the original or decent translation)

          ===============
          The essence of the article: REVENGE, revenge.
          Find the enemy. “GUILTY” in all our troubles. Make him the “scapegoat”, Direct the anger of the electorate towards him. Under this guise to solve their affairs

          How did the revenge in Germany end, after 1 MV - I remember. And you?

          And about our troubles. Let's remember the spring of 1987 - the premiere of "Assy" in the recreation center MELZ:
          Our hearts demand change
          Changes require our eyes.
          In our laughter and in our tears
          And in the throbbing veins ...
          Change, we are waiting for change.


          ALL COUNTRY demanded. This is not just a song, it is a symbol of a change of era
          1. Kaa
            Kaa 14 May 2013 14: 13 New
            0
            Quote: Postman
            Hu from all over the West?
            Germany, Finland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Italy, Croatia (then part of Yugoslavia) Albania (volunteers), Spain (volunteers), Scandinavians from Norway and Sweden (volunteers) Czech Republic (industry that gave a quarter of Wehrmacht arms), France (volunteers + the entire industry that worked on the Wehrmacht, by the way, Churchill included it in the list of countries = winners only at the insistence of the ITT, it painfully spoiled the nerves of the Angles in North Africa), Benelux (volunteers + industry) Poland, which gave 550000 soldiers against Hitler and 1000000 for Hitler ... I don’t remember right away. maybe someone forgot, let them excuse me.
            1. postman
              postman 14 May 2013 14: 43 New
              0
              Quote: Kaa
              Germany, Finland, Romania, Hungary

              Let’s not volunteers to drag in here. And it turns out NATO fought against Serbia against Russia
              And remember: Resistance, Coalition, Concentration Camps, OCCUPATION
              Do you know how much Switzerland shot down (and planted) German Messerschmitts? What about ground clashes?
              And how Mussolini hollowed Hitler: make peace with the USSR, cats to be a mediator?

              Quote: Kaa
              By the way, Churchill included her in the list of countries = winners only at the insistence of the IVS,

              IVS- was insidious, you will not refuse him this. in this well done.
              I always remember Wilhelm Bodewin Johann Gustav Keitel about the French: "And these x..and do it here?"
              =================
              What you have listed is ALL THE SAME THAT AND WHEN 1 WWII (Napoleon vs RUSSIA).
              Something I did not meet the statement (from sane people) that in 1814 "capitulated not only to Russia Francebut the whole West "
              /
              Prussia entered the coalition with Russia in March 1813, then England, Austria and Sweden entered the summer of that year, and after the defeat of Napoleon in the Battle of the Peoples near Leipzig in October 1813, the German states of Württemberg and Bavaria joined the coalition. Independently with Napoleon, Spain, Portugal and England fought on the Iberian Peninsula. Active hostilities took place during the year from May 1813 to April 1814 with a 2-month truce in the summer of 1813.
              /

              On July 8, 1807, Emperor Alexander I concluded the Peace of Tilsit with Napoleon, by which he undertook to join the continental blockade of Great Britain.

              After 1807, Britain remained the only enemy of Napoleon

              Following the results of the Tilsit Peace and Erfurt Congress, Russia in 1808 seized Finland from Sweden

              In 1811, Napoleon told his ambassador to Warsaw, Abbot de Pradt: “In five years I will be the ruler of the whole world. Only Russia remains - I will crush it ... "


              May 30, 1814 peace was signed

              ================
              Isn’t it reminiscent of something?
              Grande Armée - composition (nationality, citizenship) - check out pliz.
              European industry: who worked for Napoleon in 1807-1814. Need to list?
            2. Santa Fe
              Santa Fe 14 May 2013 17: 09 New
              +1
              Quote: Kaa
              Albania (volunteers), Spain (volunteers)

              If we talk about volunteers - there are no equal Russian
              • Division 'Russia', also - Division “Russland”
              • Volunteer SS regiment "Varyag"
              • Russian detachment of the 9th Wehrmacht Army
              • 15 Cossack Cavalry Corps SS
              • 1 Russian National SS Team “Druzhina”, also known as 1 Russian National SS Team
              • 29-I Grenadier Division of the SS (Russian Nr.1)
              • 30-I Grenadier Division of the SS (2-I Russian)
              • Air Force CONR (Air Force ROA)
              • 1-I division ROA / VS KONR (600-infantry division of the Wehrmacht)
              • 2-I division ROA / VS CONR (650-I infantry division)
              • 602th East Battalion
              • 645 Battalion
              • ROND / RNSD
              • Russian personnel in the SS division Charlemagne
              • Russian personnel in the SS division “Dirlewanger”
              • Russian personnel in the SS division of Wallonia

              ║ By 1943, the following units were part of the Wehrmacht and the SS (in addition to purely Cossack):
              1. Separate Russian battalions No. 601-620, 627-650, 661-669 (by July 1943 there were 78 (up to 80000 people));
              2. Russian Separate Volunteer Regiment No. 700 Colonel Caretti;
              3. 29-I assault brigade of the SS "RONA" B.V. Kaminsky (20 000 people);
              4.1-th eastern reserve regiment "Center" Lieutenant Colonel N. G. Yanenko;
              5. Major Desna Spare Volunteer Regiment;
              6. Special SS-brigade “Druzhina” of Lieutenant Colonel V.V. Gil (up to 8000 people);
              7. Separate guard battalion of the ROA in Pskov S.I. Ivanova.
              Only up to 600.000 people.

              What should a country be like if its own citizens hated it SO?
              Quote: Kaa
              Czech Republic (industry that gave a quarter of Wehrmacht weapons)

              It is interesting to compare the “Czech aid” to the Reich, for example, with the flow of Lend-Lease cargo
          2. Egen
            Egen 15 May 2013 06: 58 New
            0
            Quote: Postman
            He is trying to refute the absurd (article)! I’m talking about something else, about the immorality of the article itself and the “postulates”, “axioms” set forth in it, as well as “childish” (I would say perverted) babble in comments.

            aah, well, that’s how it’s already understood :) That's why I write that I can say nothing about the facts in different ways :)
            Churchill's speech - well, by and large all the speeches are also words, you need to look at things :))
        2. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 14 May 2013 17: 00 New
          0
          Quote: Egen
          But the result is not so obvious: the USSR would technically capture continental Europe,

          How long?

          The problem of the USSR is that in the event of a war with the USA, the country's main industrial bases (most importantly, oil) would be in the radius of destruction.

          At the same time, Europe was shocked by the Second Overlord - the amers returned with reinforcements ... human resources, equipment - the capabilities of the USA and the USSR were simply not comparable.
          Everything is so obvious that there is no reason to argue.

          The United States was this war is not needed (no need). USSR - too. attack first meant the imminent death of the USSR as a state
    5. The comment was deleted.
  25. Grigor61
    Grigor61 11 May 2013 20: 11 New
    0
    Great article. There would be more of these, and even at school they would read them to children. Many thanks to the author.
  26. Docklishin
    Docklishin 11 May 2013 23: 02 New
    0
    I completely agree with Grigor61. Gracefully, beautifully, logically and calculated several steps forward. That's what politics means, backed up by a strong army and navy. I partially agree with Sweet_sixteen - remote warfare is definitely better than cavalry attacks on machine-gun fortifications. However, as indicated in the article, 1% existed (as in the case of the creation of the first nuclear weapons by the amers, so in the Caribbean, but what is there really to be hidden in the 90s). As long as there exists in Russia a memory of glorious history, traditions and national cultural structure, then even a 1% probability of annihilation will constrain adversaries. After all, they also know Our History well hi
  27. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 13 May 2013 12: 19 New
    +2
    The article is uniquely +++. The events were after all. And the capitulation of the West was also. And arguments about whether the West needed a war with the USSR were groundless, if only for the reason that in such a war the people of the United States and England themselves would have hung their governments on lanterns. Then, NO ONE doubted that the USSR had won the Victory with the help of the allies, and not the other way round.