Military Review

Why did not Hitler prepare for war?

274
Reading Western historians is a pleasure: it seems that they themselves have not seen their own books about World War II. Otherwise, they would have crossed out from them incredible blunders with which these books are full. For example, such: "Hitler was constantly mistaken in determining the start of the war - September 1 1939 of the year."


Why did not Hitler prepare for war?

Think about it: the main aggressor of all times and peoples was mistaken with the terms of the war, which he himself unleashed!

How can this be? This is nonsense! Only those who are attacked can be mistaken with the terms of the war, but the attacker cannot make mistakes, because the aggressor himself initiates the date of the outbreak of hostilities. Two mutually exclusive things speak about the Führer: Hitler supposedly planned an aggressive war and seized the whole world, but he was mistaken with the terms. Early began. And the main fact is lost in the verbal husk: Germany, starting the war first, attacking Poland, was for some reason not ready for war.

Why did Hitler start the war without preparing? This is where the thesis of his idiocy and unreasonable aggressiveness goes - and there seems to be no need for any explanation. Maniac, he is a maniac, what his demand. Meanwhile, everything is completely different. All the “riddles” of the Second World War can be solved if you understand the logic of the actions of the main participants in the events. The strongest powers of those years: Britain and France. Without breaking the most powerful English fleet, there is no reason to think about any world domination. Consequently, in preparation for challenging the Anglo-Saxons, whose official ally Poland was attacked by Germany's 01.09.1939, you must first build a fleet comparable to the British. And only after that you can start the fight.

Adolf Hitler really began to build a fleet. Only strangely enough: the Reich shipbuilding program was supposed to be completed only in 1944 — 1945. Why did the Führer start the war in 1939?


And what kind of ships did the Germans build? The head of the German Navy, Admiral Raeder, offered Hitler a choice of two plans for the development of the German fleet:
- the first one assumed the reinforced construction of submarines in the most urgent perspective;

- the second, known as the “Z” plan, was designed for a long term, since justified by the fact that "the war will not start in the next ten years2". According to this plan it was necessary to build many large surface ships. Despite the fact that the plan was calculated for 10 years (up to 1948 year), Hitler demanded that it be completed in 6 years. So, judging by the chosen plan for the development of the fleet, the Fuhrer was going to fight with England not earlier than 1944 — 1945. I started on 1939! And the main striking force in the outbreak of the war began ... submarines. To produce that in large quantities and immediately, Hitler just forbade, choosing an alternative plan "Z"!

Here is what the Anglo-Saxon researchers write about this: “The reason for this very erroneous decision, in the light of the events that followed, is quite difficult to understand. Hitler seemed to believe that large warships could have political influence3. ” According to Western historians, Hitler simply "forgot" that even in the First World War, German submarines had put Britain on the brink of death, sending dozens and hundreds of British ships to the bottom. After all, England is an island, and all its supplies are carried out by sea. But the British surface fleet is a foolish undertaking: the British are closely watching the shipbuilding of other countries, and for each of your ships can build two of their own. The capabilities of the shipyards of the British Empire exceeded at that time the capabilities of any other power.

And so, in preparation for “capturing the whole world,” Adolf Hitler accepted the plan: to build submarines at least, and of surface ships at most. Deadlines, too, can not help but surprise: 1944 — 1945 years. Is Hitler in his mind? After all, from the moment of the adoption of the (1938) plan to the beginning of the war in September 1939, only one year will pass and the surface ships will not be built yet? What is the Fuhrer going to fight with the English fleet, forbidding to build submarines, and not having time to create surface warships?

But he did not intend to fight with Britain. Hitler was preparing ONLY for the war with the Soviet Union, which at the end of 30-s did not have any "world domination." All the while in power, Hitler was preparing for another war — an attack on the USSR. And not to the Second World War, which turned out in reality. It was for a strike on the USSR that Britain, France and the USA brought the possessed Fuhrer to power in Germany.

Now back to the German submarines. In order for submarines to show themselves in all their glory, a worthy opponent is needed. More precisely - a suitable victim. For hundreds of submarines, there is work only when the fleet of Great Britain and its allies is sinking. The USSR did not have a sufficient number of ships, and therefore no targets for attacks by German submarines. Even before the start of the conflict with the USSR, it was clear to Hitler that Germany did not need many submarines to fight the Soviet fleet. But for the war with England you need, and the more, the better. But Hitler is preparing to fight with Stalin and therefore prohibits the building of submarines in large quantities.

Here is the schedule for launching German submarines: in 1935, the -14 submarines; in 1936, -21; in 1937, the 1 (!) submarine; 1938 g. - 9; 1939 -18 Submarines4. Before us is the schedule of the power, about the war with England, even without thinking! Eighteen boats for 1939 a year is a lot or a little? Compared with the one in 1937, the growth of their output by 18 times, but compared to the figures for the subsequent production, the impression is that the Germans didn’t make submarines “preparing to take over the whole world”. Having launched World War II with 57 submarines, they produced 1 on January 1940 through 8 on May 1945 of the year - 1095 of submarines 5, which means more than 200 per year.

Maybe 57 boats a lot? Maybe in England and France in September 1939, they were significantly less? Not. England had 65 boats, France - 78 6. Grand Admiral Raeder reported to the Führer that for a war with England you need 300 submarines, but when the war began, Germany had not even a 57 submarine, ready to go to the Atlantic, but only 23! The rest for various reasons could not fight. That is, the Fuhrer again "made a mistake" in the timing of the beginning of the conflict without even bothering to bring the fleet into proper form. How can you prepare for war with maritime powers? Of course not! Hitler did not prepare for a war at sea, without which it is simply impossible to crush Britain, the “mistress of the seas". Because I did not prepare for war with England and France in general! Here is such a strange aggressor, who, allegedly, was going to take over the whole world.

But what about the Hitlerite plans to build aircraft carriers and battleships? What do they tell us? Yes, about the same: Hitler did not prepare for war with England and in 1945. This is easy to understand by looking at the numbers on the “Z” plan. We will not bore the reader with this math, who wants to, can see them independently7. We note only an obvious fact: even after 100% of the fulfillment of the plan to build aircraft carriers and battleships, the German fleet would be less than even one British, not to mention the combined power of the Anglo-French fleet. Not to mention that all six years of the implementation of the “Z” plan, the British shipyards would not stand idle either.

Hitler in 1939 did not think about the big war. And in a small conflict with Poland, he hoped to do on his own. And therefore, embroiled in a world war, not having a reliable ally. The USSR was not such an ally for Germany, and was not going to fight on Hitler’s side. But even the Italians were not going to fight on the German side! 20 August 1939, i.e. 11 days before the start of the war, Mussolini learned about Hitler's plans to start it. And he was horrified! The very next day, August 21, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy made a special note for the Germans. It said that the German-Italian alliance, the so-called “Steel Pact”, was signed on the terms that the war would be unleashed no earlier than in two or three years. And here - it starts less in 2 weeks. When in the reply message the Germans asked Mussolini to indicate what should be done to ensure that Italy did not “embarrass” earlier terms, the Italians rolled out such obviously unrealistic supplies of materials weapons and ammunition that Germany could never fulfill them. And without all this, Mussolini concluded, he cannot fight. What do you think, did Hitler, having lost his essentially ONLY ally at that moment? Nothing. Decided to fight alone! Italy really did not fight until the summer of 1940, and entered the war a few days before the capitulation of France. And the brunt of world war, Germany bore alone.

So what really happened? And that's what. Brought to power by the West, Hitler promised to attack the USSR. And I got everything I needed — money, power, technology, and entire countries — until I built a huge military machine. And then he started talking to his masters differently. What did the Führer ask for? Just equality in this Anglo-Saxon world. Neither of which world domination was ever discussed, Hitler never even dreamed of capturing the whole world. But the rulers of the world demanded that Hitler fulfill his obligations. Equality for Germany, peace for the Germans with the Anglo-Saxons, could only be obtained through the total destruction of Russia and its population. Our territory and resources are subject to sharing. Entry ticket to the club favorites. Hitler attacked and got the opportunity to quietly fight on the Eastern Front. The second front in Europe was opened only when it became clear that the Red Army alone would reach Berlin.

Nikolai Starikov, (details in the book "Who made Hitler attack Stalin?")


1 J. Kershaw. Hitler Rostov - on the Don: Phoenix, 1997, p. Xnumx
2 C. Nimitz., E. Potter. War at sea 1939 — 1945.,
Smolensk, Rusich, 1999, p.11
3 ibid., P. Xnumx
4 ibid., P. 32-33
5 ibid., P. Xnumx
6 Protracted blitzkrieg. German generals about the war in
Russia. M., 2006, p.292
7 For example: K. Dönitz. Reich submarine fleet ..., Smolensk, Rusich, 1999, p. 38-39 or N. Kuznetsov. On the eve of. M .: AST, 2003, p. 390.
Author:
Originator:
http://nstarikov.ru/
274 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Canep
    Canep 18 May 2013 07: 05
    +4
    But he did not intend to fight with Britain. Hitler was preparing ONLY for the war with the Soviet Union, which at the end of 30-s did not have any "world domination." All the while in power, Hitler was preparing for another war — an attack on the USSR. And not to the Second World War, which turned out in reality. It was for a strike on the USSR that Britain, France and the USA brought the possessed Fuhrer to power in Germany.

    Hitler also attacked the USSR unprepared without winter clothes for the army, and in 42-43 winter clothes did not appear in Stalingrad. Even if they had captured the USSR by the fall of 41, the troops would still have to somehow hibernate. The swindler.
    1. Uhalus
      Uhalus 18 May 2013 08: 37
      34 th
      And what could he do? England is crushing on the one hand, on the other, the USSR is preparing for liberation ... (we had preparation for war — on the territory of the enemy, with little blood, a mighty blow, that is, a surprise attack). Well, I started as I could. And really very unprepared.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Shadowcat
        Shadowcat 18 May 2013 09: 58
        13
        Ahem ... and it was necessary to plan the strategy so that they would lure us deeper into our territory and defeat the enemy as Napoleon’s Kutuzov? despite the fact that the industrial and agricultural potential is lost which, in general, was all in the European part of the USSR at that time, putting the main oil field (Baku) of the country at risk of capture?
        From this, a simple conclusion is drawn that the strategy itself is obliged to be offensive, preventing the enemy from entering and destroying the industrial-agrarian potential of the country that it created.
        And, yes, about the suddenness, given that in 41, infantry divisions were deployed on the USSR border, equipped (!) On a wartime basis, while the USSR did not mobilize its troops and put them forward to the border, i.e. the state was in peacetime. And what kind of sudden blow is there to talk about?

        England, the PPC was crushing, except that the massive gifts during the panic evacuation from Normandy were an insidious plan that the Germans who would operate this equipment would not have spare parts and it would break during the offensive.
        I’m silent about the little ones in Africa, if Romel was such a cool Fox as the allies put him out (you need to work out for them that he passed France to them at one time), then in Africa they would have bent before the 42nd year.
        1. Uhalus
          Uhalus 18 May 2013 23: 59
          -2
          Quote: ShadowCat

          And, yes, about the suddenness, given that in 41, infantry divisions were deployed on the USSR border, equipped (!) On a wartime basis, while the USSR did not mobilize its troops and put them forward to the border, i.e. the state was in peacetime. And what kind of sudden blow is there to talk about?

          Here I disagree with you. There was mobilization. We have a number of ... "family legends", or something ... In general, I will present, and you draw conclusions.
          In the spring of 40, they began actively, at the call of the draft board, to take doctors and nurses into the army; by the summer of 41, the staff of hospitals had been halved with the same number of patients; especially not lucky surgeons.
          In 1940, from April to October, a military hospital was completely (!) Built, known until the late 80s as a veteran hospital (currently abandoned); everything was allocated under this and with almost a surplus.
          A doctor who was mobilized in November 40 under the guise of withdrawing from the reserve (had military experience) and went through the entire war, including the Japanese one, in the 80s said that he had seen a large medical warehouse in the open air - medicines, materials, sets of tools were lying directly on loading trays and were only covered with a tarp. When it began, all this went to the Germans (if it didn’t burn out). He just saw an immense warehouse of shoes, stored in the same way. And it was two (!) Km from the border!
          He recalled that it was crowded there: military units stood very densely everywhere; most of the units were long rows of tents with soldiers and officers.
          What can we say about the state if suddenly a lot of doctors were raked into the army? What can be said about the immediate plans if the breakthrough of valuable materials lies directly on the ground without a roof and under the nose of almost the enemy? What else can be said if the breakthrough people live under the enemy’s nose in tents? Just what is about to to start. And all this somehow does not look like preparations for defense. Conclusion: the Fuhrer just managed a little earlier, the reptile was lucky. What prevented him from postponing the date of the onset of the week again so 3-4? Oh ...
          About the "lure deeper" strategy. No, you don't have to lure. It is enough to have a pair of quality defensive belts. Only they do not need to be moved to the very border. And it is certainly not necessary to push troops and materials to the very border.
          I’m not an army ... But it seems to me that the strategy may not matter what, the main thing is that it reaches the goal - defeating the enemy, so that he does not rise. Therefore, do not cling to the words, please.
          As for the pressure of England - it was vital for her to know where the Fuhrer would go. Anywhere, just to make it profitable. Well, they miscalculated a little, as sometimes happens. They fed the rat, and she attacked them. True, not so hot as it could have been better, the USSR got more incomparably.
          1. tomket
            tomket 19 May 2013 11: 44
            +3
            Again the reason. I've also seen in 2008. in 10 km from Norway, an immense warehouse with camouflage shoes and other ammunition, and also was at the RAV warehouse where I saw a huge amount of charges for RPGs, but forgive me, we never drank Norway. If there would be such a breakthrough on the border of the people of which you and the rezun are trying to convince us, the Germans would not be physically able to grind them so quickly. An example is the same cauldrons of the end of the 41 year, when the Germans almost choked on swallowing too large pieces.
            1. domokl
              domokl 19 May 2013 17: 11
              0
              Quote: tomket
              Again the reason.
              Speculally read comments, I wanted to write the same thing ... And this person claims to be some kind of social leadership?
            2. Uhalus
              Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 02
              +3
              You yourself ... such a word. I repeat: family traditions, only by unlucky chance similar to Rezun's writings. And do not unite me with him. And one more thing: one is a warehouse according to all the rules (maybe there are consumables for border guards there), and another is a warehouse on the ground directly; and what to do with the breakthrough of the people, located again near the border?
              And you can physically grind anything quickly, especially when you have high concentration of guns and aircraft and supplies to themas in front of the Soviet border.
            3. Larus
              Larus 20 May 2013 16: 19
              -1
              That one legend writes that this one, forgetting that the war was already underway in Europe, and there is nothing surprising if the medical staff will be trained in case of something else ...
            4. Alex
              Alex 21 August 2013 12: 25
              +2
              Strange, everything seems to be right, but there are obvious problems with logic. Yes, and an understanding of elementary strategic principles, too. Read the documents (there is no need for Rezun either), they perfectly reflect where, when and which divisions and armies were deployed and concentrated, where they were heading and in what condition their war found. Only without fitting to a previously known result.
          2. Shadowcat
            Shadowcat 19 May 2013 13: 30
            +1
            Well, let's take a look at all this.
            Quote: Uhalus
            Mobilization was

            According to documents, by the way declassified and accessible to absolutely everyone in the archive, the mobilization was announced on June 22, 1941, the first day is considered the 23rd.
            http://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Указ_Президиума_ВС_СССР_от_22.06.1941_о_мобилизаци
            and_military_four_fourteen_military_districts
            I want to note that the maintenance of troops in deployed orders, i.e. according to the state of wartime (in mobilized form) it is expensive since there is a huge number of consuming, but not producing people. Plus decomposed discipline and stuff. Also, during such a moment, this can be considered a threat to a neighboring state, i.e. reason for declaring war.
            You most likely oppose the following point:
            According to the law adopted on September 1, 1939 at the extraordinary fourth session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the draft age for military men fell from 21 to 19 years, and for those who graduated from high school to 18 years. At the same time, the periods of active service in the army and navy and the duration of training fees for citizens in stock were increased. As a result, the number of the Armed Forces in the period from September 1, 1939 to June 21, 1941 increased by more than 2,8 times 2 (History of the Second World War 1939-1945 T. 3. P. 44. - Approx. Author).
            which is the result of increasing the number of people in the troops.
            But it was wrong to look at a fire raging at a neighbor's place and hope that it will not flare up in your garden? I remind you that the Second World War began officially in 1939 (in my opinion, the IMHU began in March 1938), and the closest neighbor, that is, first Poland (whose government vehemently "loved" the USSR) and built fortifications on the border with the USSR and accumulating troops on it, and after Germany with simple accumulation and "strengthening of the border".

            In 1940, from April to October, a military hospital was completely (!) Built, known until the late 80s as a veteran hospital (currently abandoned); everything was allocated under this and with almost a surplus.
            those. Do you think that any medical institution in the army (you won’t believe this current, the medical board can instantly heal any disease chichas, but alas, people have the pain to suffer from simple diarrhea to appendectomy) is a sign of aggression and a plan of war?

            A doctor mobilized in November 40 under the guise of withdrawing from the reserve (had military experience) and having gone through the entire war, including the Japanese one, in the 80s said he saw a large open-air medical warehouse - medicines,
            The most terrible nonsense of a madman. You read through the warehouse IN THE OPEN AIR... Hello, rain, sand, water, mud and other parasha - and this is all in medicine, where everything must be sterile. Besides, as Comrade Zhiglov said, "Not a fact." (I think everyone will remember that monologue and do not need to fully quote it)
            I also skip the rest for see above. This is not transported anywhere and never in this form.
            1. Uhalus
              Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 21
              0
              As for the "terrible delirium": yes, the old horse-radish got confused in the days of the week, but he remembered the old iron. And if a hole of valuable junk lies in the open, then what? - it means that it will soon be used up and before the rain, and even more so until the snow, it will not last exactly.
              Not any. Military hospital deep rear. A hospital of this level was built in 2 to 3 years; Weren't you surprised at the speed of construction? Why all of a sudden all of materials and equipment, convicts (all of them were built not only by ordinary workers, but also by prisoners)? what conclusions can be drawn? And that is a fact.
              You write: "I want to note that the maintenance of troops in deployed orders, ie according to the state of war (in mobilized form) is expensive because there is a huge number of consuming, but not producing people. Plus, discipline and so on disintegrate. when such a moment is held, this can be considered a threat to the neighboring state, that is, the reason for declaring war. " Exactly, and I'm talking about this: what kind of lada it is to keep a lot of people at the border, and even in tents? Someone else wrote that this is a demonstration of force ... I will say that this is the most idiotic form of demonstration, and our generals, even who turned out to be traitors, were not idiots by birth. Means?
              Naturally, Stalin was never an idiot and did not trust Hitler (and who can be trusted in politics at all ?!). And mobilization can be declared official, or you can slowly begin to form new units from conscripts, while leaving the old ones with an extended service life to "serve"; and the number of troops at the same time - what? - increases. This process I called not quite correctly mobilization, it is much slower than real mobilization.
              1. Shadowcat
                Shadowcat 20 May 2013 06: 49
                -2
                Quote: Uhalus
                and, the old horseradish was confused in the days of the week, but the old remembered iron

                I have a lot of tales, I think others have no less

                Quote: Uhalus
                And if a breakthrough of valuable junk lies in the open, then what? - it means that it will soon be used up before the rain, and even more so before the snow, it will not last for sure.

                Sir, are you reading what is written? But what about rain, animals, insects, dirt, rust. In addition to rain, there is the so-called dew from which tarpaulins cannot be protected. Therefore, as a result, as if soon it was not used up, and the materiel was spoiled. And for this they asked strictly, this is a fact.
                Quote: Uhalus
                Weren't you surprised at the speed of construction?

                No. At that time, motivated very well, and not at the temple. There is such a thing as a workday, i.e. I have to come and work from 9 to 16 (for example). If you stay and work beyond the norm, then for every hour (for example, again, I don’t remember the whole layout), you + en rubles from above. What is not a motivator? if you want to work, you want to go foolishly mayya.
                For convicts, in the same way, only for each processing period the time was mowed and the ration increased, which also played into the hands of the speed of construction.
                And yes, speaking of the speed of construction, in Thailand a 5-storey building is being built completely in three months completely and is being commissioned on a turn-key basis. Probably also preparing for war, deploy troops ....
                Quote: Uhalus
                That's it, and I’m talking about this: what kind of lyada to keep a lot of people near the border, and even in tents?

                Provide documents of it. Plus, do not forget that there were and were military games in order to improve the skills of troops and commanders, finding and eliminating errors. (oh yes, here we are going to declare war on everyone and everything now ... Won recently conducted exercises in the Caucasus, Belarus, and chichas and the Pacific) - and this is the departure of troops from the unit and the installation of the camp (tents and other) in the forest.
                Quote: Uhalus
                And mobilization can be declared official, or you can slowly begin to form new units from conscripts

                And if it reveals the enemy’s intelligence to sit in a large puddle. Parts by the way were formed officially. And yes, there is no such thing as unofficial mobilization, no.

                So you say all this (I watched Rezun’s creation, looked) but give me a link to the documents, because, as I said, most of these papers are declassified and stored in the state archive, which can be accessed for study.
                1. Alex
                  Alex 21 August 2013 12: 52
                  +2
                  There is such a joke (since 70's).
                  The American asked the Russian:
                  - When will you build communism?
                  To which he replied:
                  - So what. But you have blacks lynched.

                  This is to not confuse the current idiocy (here it makes no difference, in Russia or in our long-suffering Ukraine), called military training, with large-scale millions of deployments of armies in other strategic echelons. And their existence through gritted teeth was recognized by many official historians. And skipping to other topics, very distant, although similar, from the topic is not the best method of discussion.

                  In addition, I note - the mechanized corps - to take away not defense weapons. And they wanted to form not a lot, no less - forty pieces. And you say, a demonstration of strength and the desire to put enemy intelligence in a puddle. If so, then you can congratulate yourself - scares intelligence so that five years later they were washed from their diarrhea.
          3. Shadowcat
            Shadowcat 19 May 2013 13: 30
            -3
            But I will continue from here ...
            About the "lure deeper" strategy. No, you don't have to lure. It is enough to have a pair of quality defensive belts.

            The delirium of the mad remaining in real life until the First World War. Have you ever been in the steppe? (consider the whole of Ukraine) and how to block it? This is not a mountain or a swamp where he blocked two paths and sit hoping that you will not be ironed by artillery or will not get around.
            Yes, you can say that you can come up with anti-tank hedgehogs, dig up anti-tank ditches - but these are half measures that can delay from several hours to several days (depending on the persistence of the defending and advancing). Bunkers are burned and exploded, hedgehogs and ditches are simply ironed by artillery and become passable for tanks. And again, hello there is room for maneuver.

            Quote: Uhalus
            Only they do not need to be moved to the border itself. And certainly it is not necessary to push troops and materials to the very border.
            Here it’s your truth, but you should not push the reserves of the line to where. So it’s quite normal that they were next to the troops. Can you imagine how quickly the ammunition is consumed in a clash? How much does one piece of equipment and other things need? Yes, you can say that, for example, for a hundred people there are only one hundred sets, but we are not all made under the same stamping - I have 40 feet size, my friend is 45th, while I wear a T-shirt in size L, and he is XL. It turns out at least three sets per soldier, ideally. So the warehouse is clogged.

            Quote: Uhalus
            I'm not an army

            I, too, am far from an army man, but I happened to be a supplier, giving out equipment to submariners for hire from the warehouse, or even taking it all out. This is one person's bag turns. And the supplier has two per person.
            And about the defense ... neither the battle nor the peg will give an understanding of what defense is in the open field and a detour in the forest. Play a couple of times in some military-applied game such as strike or paintball and you will understand how easy it is to manage non-army ones.
            1. Uhalus
              Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 31
              -1
              And no need to build in the steppe! "Stalin's Line" was made much more convenient and sensible! But why was it disarmed and weapons and materials thrown to the border? Even unfinished, it was strong and could slow down the Germans well. Dotas can be eliminated, but not immediately. Any defensive line can be broken. The question is when and by what forces and losses?
              How quickly ammunition is consumed, I know very well. I am engaged in "extreme shooting", i.e. extreme shooting. It's like paintball, only with a traumatic weapon; from protection - only a sphere on the head and a belt of a strange shape ... they themselves understood why, I think. An unforgettable experience with a 16 gauge ribbed ...
              And I repeat: the warehouse to the warehouse - discord. It’s one thing - a consumables warehouse for a part, another is a series of materials per good kilometer (my artistic exaggeration is an example)
              1. Shadowcat
                Shadowcat 20 May 2013 07: 21
                -3
                Quote: Uhalus
                Stalin's line "was made much more convenient and sensible! But why was it disarmed and weapons and materials were thrown to the border? Even unfinished, it was strong and could cool the Germans well

                Armament 90% built DOT and DOS should be one, at least - two machine guns "Maxim". Only up to 10% of the firing points (more precisely, 9,3%) did the cannons of the design of General Durlyakhov arr. 1904 g. For 76-mm guns arr. 1900 and 1902, but the guns for 1 January 1939 was found only a third of the required quantity and they were withdrawn from long-term storage facilities and were mostly incomplete.
                I wish German tanks laughed when they began to shoot at them from a machine gun.
                But this is nonsense ... we look further correspondence
                "NPO comrade Voroshilov
                5th of January 1939
                ... According to the Special Department of the BVI, the construction of Slutsky SD is very unsatisfactory ... Only 91 was built from the 1938 facility scheduled for construction under the 13 plan ... The work was deployed with considerable delay, as the drawings and plans of the facilities were sent from the Engineering Department with a delay of several months ...
                L. Beria "

                "NPO USSR comrade Voroshilov
                13 February 1939 city
                Despite the long construction and additional equipment of the Pskov and Ostrovsky SD, they cannot be considered combatable at the present time. Due to the inadequately designed and built in-house equipment of most DOTs, they cannot be occupied by troops ... up to half of the structures on the 20-40 cm are filled with water caused by an incorrect assessment of the groundwater depth. At the same time, the water supply system is not working ... There is no electrical equipment in the fortified areas ... In the living rooms of the UR there is high humidity and stale air ...
                UR supply centers are not built ... There are no food warehouses ...
                Due to illiterate planning of SD, their fire installations cannot fire at a distance of more than 50-100 m, so the terrain has hillocks, ravines and non-cut forests. DOS number 3, is installed on the slope of a ravine and cannot be masked due to permanent landslides, and the gun-half canopy in it is useless, as it is located below the level of the surrounding terrain ... To expand the shelling sectors, you need to remove about 120 cubic meters of land, and also cut down to 000 hectares of forests and bushes ...
                The bunker's bunks are designed for the use of Maxim machine guns, but they are equipped with machines of unknown design ... most likely designed for the Hotchkiss machine gun, which had been removed from service for a long time. Cannon polukaponiry are not equipped with armor valves and serve as a source of penetration into the bunker of melt water and precipitation ...
                The artillery armament of the UR consists of 6 obsolete 1877 field guns of the year, to which there are no projectiles ...
                The territory is not protected by SD. In the course of the work, the commission repeatedly met local residents passing in the immediate vicinity of the firing facilities to shorten the path between the settlements ...
                L. Beria "

                And how are these species?
                1. Uhalus
                  Uhalus 20 May 2013 18: 15
                  0
                  M-yes, ate ... I agree with you.
                2. Alex
                  Alex 21 August 2013 16: 34
                  +2
                  Only one thing - SDs were already not considered as a strategic necessity as a primary need. And German tanks with their mostly machine-gun and small-caliber weapons would not laugh very much when field anti-tank artillery (45 mm for these imperfections was enough with their heads for the most part, I’m silent about the 76 mm Grabin!). And for effective fire in different angles, it’s just not necessary to put guns in the caponiers. A tuk would be more appropriate to equip 2-3 of the mortal positions 9does not shoot) and powerful cover from the enemy infantry (so as not to bypass). Here the pillboxes with their machine guns and almost invulnerable calculations are just a fabulous help for the infantry in the field. And German tanks with their armor in 10-15 mm (this is about the majority, do not have to be righteous with anger over Czech and German recent modifications) will still have to choose: do they somehow cope with the pillboxes, leaving the children of Hayram Maxim to mow the infantry, whether to hunt for artillery (God willing, something will work out), or whether to call the aircraft (and smoke nervously aside). And if those same mechanized corps are also standing in the rear and waiting in the wings, then this is the purpose of the pillboxes and bunkers. And then it turns out like in a computer game - with one tank we decide the whole campaign.
              2. Alex
                Alex 21 August 2013 16: 20
                +2
                Add and my five cents. Garrison warehouses are never built in the forest. Not only should they be stored on them, they should be taken out of them and, accordingly, they should be brought in. And not in piece quantities. And in the event of a threat of war, it is completely in huge volumes and in a short time. So there is not a hill of something in the forest, but capital buildings with convenient entrances and a railway station nearby (this is ideal). In the camps, he himself guarded such division warehouses in Baturin, saw what it was and only 25 km from the railway line with a dozen stations and platforms.
                But if someone makes such a warehouse and is not afraid of a special meeting for wrecking (you say it yourself, everything can go with the rain and the beast), and even organize security in a completely undeveloped place (and this is not a collective farm guard with a berdanka and Tuzik on rope), then you can be sure - soon people with equipment will come here and will sort all this stuff out of ammunition and duffel bags.
            2. Alex
              Alex 21 August 2013 16: 10
              +2
              And I allow myself to comment.
              1.
              Have you ever been in the steppe? (consider the whole of Ukraine) and how to block it?

              Have you ever seen Ukraine? At least on the map? Her, my dear, and do not need to block. Dnieper, however. But there are no rivers equal to him in the old Europe (a civilized Danube with an immense number of bridges and well-maintained banks does not count). The reservoir in the Zaporozhye region is also not a bath in the sauna. It’s not realistic for tanks to pass such lines, and competent defense in this place is a factor of serious deterrence. In 1943, for this Dnieper, Heroes were given.

              2.
              you can come across anti-tank hedgehogs, dig up anti-tank ditches - but these are half measures that can delay from several hours to several days (depending on the persistence of the defending and advancing). Bunkers are burned and exploded, hedgehogs and ditches are simply ironed by artillery and become passable for tanks.

              All this is improvisation not from a good life. But the UR system on the "Stalin Line" is no longer children's cakes in a sandbox. Where near Kiev it was possible to organize a defense at least in haste, the Germans did not even bother: a couple of attacks, and that was all, we were starving and threatened with encirclement. I myself saw those pillboxes in Mrygi, they are still standing, darlings, and the devil does not take them, only gradually they grow into the ground. And if not to whip up garrisons from the encircled units "from the pine forest", but to occupy all the firing points, yes with the defense system of the foreground, yes with minefields, but with wire obstacles ... Vaughn Brest Fortress is at zero and I fought for a week.
              As for the painted picture of the defeat of the defense, the malicious sense here is only penniless. Namely: any oblon, if it is passive, can be hacked. But you have to fart for a long time. The Mannerheim line for two months for the Red Army was insurmountable and who knows, start the Finns full-blown offensive operation, how it would end. But the Germans were not going to storm the Maginot Line in general, but simply occupy it when the fate of the French army was already decided.

              3.
              And about the defense ... neither the battle nor the peg will give an understanding of what defense is in the open field and a detour in the forest. Play a couple of times in some military-applied game such as strike or paintball and you will understand how easy it is to manage non-army ones.

              What defense is and how it is carried out quite intelligibly (believe me!) Is described in the Combat Manual of the Ground Forces. There were such people in the Red Army and everything is also thoroughly described there. And all these "games of soldiers" ... When I met one such specialist and a newfangled "tank strategy", he did not really know the characteristics of military equipment, but he filled the enemy - where is Carrius and his comrades.
          4. Avenger711
            Avenger711 19 May 2013 13: 37
            +2
            You are, legends. Running to read normal documents, and not all nonsense. Preparation at the infrastructure level has been since the end of the 39th year, these are necessary actions, but they have nothing to do with the mobilization team.

            And drive it into your head already that no defensive and offensive wars exist. We succeeded with mobilization, everything, we carry out operations from the very first day on the enemy’s territory, even if he was the first to commit an act of aggression, according to the pre-war plans, we did not succeed, we correct the plans and most likely retreat, since we have less forces.

            It is enough to have a couple of high-quality defensive belts.


            Don’t disgrace, for God's sake, such nonsense, your defensive belts will be erased into powder even in the absence of a general numerical superiority. In the 41st, it so happened that the army, which did not have time to complete the mobilization, met the war in the form of three echelons not connected to each other.
            1. Uhalus
              Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 45
              0
              Quote: Avenger711
              You are, legends. Running to read normal documents, and not all nonsense. Preparation at the infrastructure level has been since the end of the 39th year, these are necessary actions, but they have nothing to do with the mobilization team.

              And drive it into your head already that no defensive and offensive wars exist. We succeeded with mobilization, everything, we carry out operations from the very first day on the enemy’s territory, even if he was the first to commit an act of aggression, according to the pre-war plans, we did not succeed, we correct the plans and most likely retreat, since we have less forces.

              It is enough to have a couple of high-quality defensive belts.


              Don’t disgrace, for God's sake, such nonsense, your defensive belts will be erased into powder even in the absence of a general numerical superiority. In the 41st, it so happened that the army, which did not have time to complete the mobilization, met the war in the form of three echelons not connected to each other.

              I answer. "Normal documents" - what is this? What was published and used for multivolume books such as "History of the Great Patriotic War?" Or what is well hidden and who the hell will reveal and let it go? And when ambiguities appear, here you begin to fumble on indirect ones, here the testimonies of the old people will come down, if these old people are somehow still in their minds.
              I don't agree with your attitude to defensive belts! That is why our "Mannerheim Line" was broken for a long time, with great difficulty and with great losses. If the Germans took outdated and not always strong enough border fortifications far from immediately and with great difficulty and losses, then what is even the unfinished "Stalin Line"?
              I spoke about mobilization above, I will not repeat myself.
              1. Shadowcat
                Shadowcat 20 May 2013 06: 53
                -1
                Quote: Uhalus
                I answer. "Normal documents" - what is this?

                These are orders, statements, correspondence which is stored in the archive.

                Quote: Uhalus
                Or what is well hidden and who the hell will open and let it go?

                Most of the declassified, and this is an excuse "I'm too lazy to kick my ass and go to the archive"

                Quote: Uhalus
                That is what our "Mannerheim Line" broke for a long time, difficult and with great losses
                There was no large-caliber art, "thanks" to Tukhachevsky. The same example with what speed the fortifications rolled away from the 41st to the 45th.
                1. Alex
                  Alex 21 August 2013 18: 45
                  +2
                  This is not about the reasons why WE have been fiddling with the Finns for so long, but HOW long and difficult to tinker with a well-organized defense system. Do not substitute concepts, gentlemen, this is not an argument. Although, I repeat once again, "sitting under siege war is not won"It's not me, it's Suvorov, who is Alexander Vasilyevich.
            2. Alex
              Alex 21 August 2013 18: 35
              +2
              no defensive and offensive wars exist.


              Those. Finland and France do not count?

              Don’t disgrace, for God's sake, such nonsense, your defensive belts will be erased into powder even in the absence of a general numerical superiority. In 41 it happened

              It is you who ceases to carry nonsense. These are what troops and what defensive lines. In your opinion, are two pot-nursery groups in a kindergarten capable of breaking the Maginot or Mannerheim lines? And the fact that the Germans could not overcome the hastily made, but deeply echeloned defense on the Kursk Bulge, does it mean nothing? And this is in the absence of bunkers and in the presence of such equipment, oh they only dreamed in 1941? Shame on you, right.

              the army, which did not have time to complete the mobilization, met the war in the form of three echelons not connected with each other.

              Add completely disarmed (and in some places almost destroyed URs) - here is the refutation of your own thesis. Empty pillboxes are empty pillboxes, no matter how powerful they represent.

              And the last one. Rudeness does not color anyone, nor is it an argument in a dispute.
          5. pav-pon1972
            pav-pon1972 19 May 2013 14: 05
            +3
            After the start of the fighting in Poland in 1939, hospitals were deployed on the territory of the USSR in the border regions - this is true. In the period from 1939 to 1940-October, the Poles received medical assistance at refugee camps. Some Poles were settled on the territory of Belarus, some went to explore Siberia (moreover, with their consent and financial support), mostly immigrants from the Russian Empire, for whom there were no sins (remember the 1920s, the Soviet-Polish war). Those who committed crimes got what they deserved.
          6. skeptic
            skeptic 19 May 2013 15: 03
            0
            Quote: Uhalus
            What else can be said if the breakthrough people live under the enemy’s nose in tents? Just what is about to begin. And all this somehow does not look like preparations for defense. Conclusion: the Fuhrer just managed a little earlier, the reptile was lucky.


            Let's see a little differently. No one thinks that Stalin naively believed in Hitler's peace. How can you show the potential aggressor that you are ready to confront in an emergency? All the same, the most optimal option is a demonstrative redeployment of troops closer to the border. But at the same time give an order - do not respond to provocations and do not shoot down reconnaissance aircraft. The interference of aircraft at border airfields, said that we have a lot of equipment here, but we don’t want to fight. You may ask, why weren’t capital, defensive structures built at the borders? The possibilities of the Soviet economy were not unlimited, and almost all industry was in the European part. What is more important for the country? To fit in the capital, defensive system (which, if it even has time to be completed, can be circumvented, as in France) or create the foundation for industry beyond the Urals? How much building materials do you need to create a reserve base, with the potential evacuation of factories? Why build a base for factories if you intend to attack and capture a foreign economy?

            Do not rush to rank Stalin among potential aggressors, only because of one or another indirect sign. Just as the Finnish war was launched only after unsuccessful negotiations on the exchange of territory (to move the border away from Leningrad) while no one bothered to take control of all of Finland, so the Baltic states with western Belarus and Ukraine (move the border west to the borders of the Russian Empire) If we if they don’t cross, the war would start from the old border, which means that the blitzkrieg could achieve its sad result.
            1. Shadowcat
              Shadowcat 19 May 2013 17: 09
              -1
              Quote: skeptic
              Let's see a little differently. No one thinks that Stalin naively believed in Hitler's peace.

              I agree with you on this. Toka Chamberlain believed this)
              Quote: skeptic
              All the same, the most optimal option is a demonstrative redeployment of troops closer to the border.

              And here it is not. It is like smoking next to a powder keg hoping that it would not explode from a spark. Of course, you can flaunt with muscles, but at the right time and in the right place. And there was no time and place because of the rearmament of troops, but if such movements had appeared then Hitler would not have been bluffing and Rezun would have been right.
              Quote: skeptic
              to create the foundation for industry beyond the Urals? How much building materials do you need to create a reserve base, with the potential evacuation of factories? Why build a base for factories if you intend to attack and capture a foreign economy?

              Damn, some say it, but eprst, where did you read that? give a link!
              Quote: skeptic
              How the Finnish war was launched only after unsuccessful negotiations on the exchange of territory

              To add that there were still allies trying to (the reason that the finns went into the axis block after that))))
          7. Alex
            Alex 21 August 2013 12: 22
            +2
            I absolutely agree with you. There are hundreds of such stories, if not more. My grandfather, the director of the school, a military specialty anti-aircraft platoon commander, he only had time to take exams at school, so he went to the training camp. And so it began in the summer of 1939. Grandmother said that in those years she almost went crazy, felt that the evil began. And rather big, since with this approach to war we are preparing.
        2. datur
          datur 19 May 2013 19: 08
          +1
          I’m silent about the little ones in Africa, if Romel was such a cool Fox as the allies put him out (you need to work out for them that he passed France to them at one time), then in Africa they would have bent before the 42nd year .----- ---- Well, actually, Romel drove shaving all over Africa! and had 2-3 times less people and equipment, with minimal support! several commanders of the Englishwoman were replaced, it still did not help! and Montgomery has not yet achieved 5-fold superiority, and did not even want to talk about the offensive, and then he almost lost!
          1. Shadowcat
            Shadowcat 20 May 2013 06: 59
            -1
            Sense to drive the hare in the field, from this he will not appear in the bowler. If you want a hare, you need to shoot a hare.

            Quote: datur
            and Montgomery has not yet achieved 5-fold superiority, and did not even want to talk about the offensive, and then he almost lost!

            This only says that as a commander he was a complete fool and it was not necessary to change the lower officers, but him. For example, Operation Uranus was carried out against well-entrenched Axis forces with the same number of attackers and defenders. You know the results. At the same time, there was no support for aviation during the breakthrough of the defense.
        3. Alex
          Alex 21 August 2013 12: 16
          +2
          There is no need to mock either about Kutuzov or about 1941. What happened then, and a little later, has its reasons and explanations. And no one planned to lure the enemy to Moscow. Neither 1812 nor 1941. Once again, there is no need to make jokes, there are millions of lives behind these "jokes".
      3. Atlon
        Atlon 18 May 2013 10: 07
        +1
        Quote: Uhalus
        Well, I started as I could. And really very unprepared.

        555562
        321 + 6 + 4 + 9874 The site is buggy! Do not give comments write! Admins, take action !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        1. Atlon
          Atlon 18 May 2013 10: 09
          0
          Constantly produces: The message contains inappropriate text for publication.
          1. Canep
            Canep 19 May 2013 09: 01
            0
            Also faced with such a glitch.
      4. Atlon
        Atlon 18 May 2013 10: 37
        11
        Quote: Uhalus
        Well, I started as I could. And really very unprepared.

        By the beginning of the Second World War, all authoritarian regimes in Europe were gigantic purulent boils on the body of European civilization. Of the two dozen (excluding “dwarf”) European countries that existed by June 1941, almost half - Spain, Italy, Denmark, Norway, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia (separated from the Czech Republic at that time), Finland, Croatia (highlighted and then from Yugoslavia) - together with Germany entered the war against Russia / USSR, sending their armed forces to the Eastern Front. Apart from the number of troops of these official allies of Germany, more than 1.800.000 citizens of all European countries fought in the Wehrmacht and the SS alone!

        A general impression of who fought against Soviet Russia and how could be made up of prisoners of war in May 1945: Poles surrendered to 60280, French 23136, Croats 21822, Dutch 4729, Belgians 2010, Luxembourgers 1652, dates - 456, several thousand Czechs. This is only a part of captured from several European countries that seem not to have fought against the USSR. Suffice to say that, around 600.000, prisoners from the armies of Germany and its allies were released by the Soviet command directly on the fronts after appropriate verification.
        1. Gari
          Gari 18 May 2013 11: 02
          20
          Several countries started the war against the USSR, among them:

          Romania - about 200 thousand soldiers, Slovakia - 90 thousand soldiers, Finland - about 450 thousand soldiers and officers, Hungary - about 500 thousand people, Italy - 200 thousand people, Croatia as part of the security division
          These are only those countries that officially declared war on the Soviet Union. According to various sources, from one and a half to two and a half million volunteers who fought in Wehrmacht units and SS troops took part in this “crusade” against the USSR. These are representatives of such countries as: Holland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Sweden, Finland, France, Switzerland, Spain, Luxembourg.
          1. yurta2013
            yurta2013 18 May 2013 13: 36
            14 th
            This is how many Germans in the Nazi army on the Soviet front were there, if volunteers from other countries numbered 2,5 million people, considering that Germany attacked 1941 million people according to official figures to attack the USSR in 4,6? Less than 2 million? Something is rather weak for such a country as Germany.
            1. Babon
              Babon 18 May 2013 14: 17
              11
              You take a specific day on June 22nd. You were given the facts how many were sent in 4 years to the war against us. On the border with us, that day, there were also not 10 million soldiers and not 22 tanks, so there was no need to distort it.
              1. yurta2013
                yurta2013 18 May 2013 16: 37
                13 th
                So be it. For four years, about 7 million soldiers of the German army have visited our front. It turns out that only less than 2/3 of them were Germans? All the same, common sense must be respected.
                1. smile
                  smile 18 May 2013 18: 38
                  17
                  yurta2013
                  You have incorrect information about the number of all Germans who visited our front — well, we couldn’t kill ALL-all 7 million who, in your opinion, were at the German front and still collect a bunch of prisoners ... where would the prisoners come from, if we all have already been killed ... you have something with math, or you are trying to gradually shove a lie about the minimum German losses ...
                  By the way, almost 25 million people passed through the German armed forces ... if only 7 million got to our front, then ... the remaining 17-18 million fought in those three divisions that, led by Rommel, drove a couple of years of Anglo-Saxons in the Libyan deserts? ... isn’t it funny for yourself?
                  1. yurta2013
                    yurta2013 19 May 2013 11: 33
                    -7
                    Quote: smile
                    You have incorrect information about the number of all Germans who visited our front — well, we couldn’t kill ALL — all 7 million who, in your opinion, were Germans

                    In my opinion, you have the wrong information. Germany's losses in World War II were fairly well calculated by the mid-2s. According to the German book "Results of the Second World War" (p. 50) published in our country in 1957, the German Armed Forces (within the 597 borders) lost 1937 killed (including about 3050 million who died in captivity). Another 1 were killed by soldiers from the Sudeten Germans and Germans from other Eastern European countries. The Austrians died 200 thousand. Add to them the dead Germans from Luxembourg, Alsace and Lorraine, annexed to Germany (about two times less than the Austrians) - about 230 thousand. Thus, just over 100 million German soldiers were killed in the fighting. The losses of the German army must also include the killed volunteers from the countries occupied by Germany. Wikipedia estimates the total number of such formations at 3,5 million people. However, there is no link to the source, therefore this figure is most likely taken from the ceiling. The online article "Russian Collaborationists in World War II" mentions 1,8 million non-German Wehrmacht volunteers. However, it also states that 2% of them were recruited on the territory of the USSR. Consequently, only about 1,5 thousand European volunteers fought in the German army. Their losses could hardly have been more than 75 thousand people. This means that the Wehrmacht lost in the 370nd MV about 100 million killed in battles and died from wounds. Even if only a few hundred thousand soldiers were lost on all other fronts, only a little more than 2 million remain on the Eastern Front. Another 3,6 thousand were lost by Romania, Hungary and Finland. Italy lost 3 thousand, but on our front she had only a small part of her army. Consequently, more than 422 thousand Italians could not have died here. In total, the losses of the German army and its allies on the Soviet front could not have been more than 330 million soldiers killed.
                    1. Avenger711
                      Avenger711 19 May 2013 14: 09
                      +3
                      Bullshit these calculations. There are no official sound analyzes of German losses. The very first balance sheet calculation suggests that in a country with a population of 80k people there will be approximately 20k men of military age. Even before 1.01.1945/45/16 all this resource was almost completely knocked out. Already in the winter of the 45th, XNUMX-year-old boys begin to appear at the front, who in the USSR would simply be kicked out of the military enlistment office. The losses of the XNUMXth year, this is a completely different story, when the superiority in forces was already so great that the Germans were often simply bombarded with impunity. At the same time, the German units were replenished with a banal fence of all men who could at least formally hold weapons and who later could die in the first battle without any account at all.

                      The calculations also do not include a number of paramilitary organizations, which in fact also participated in the battles.

                      There is an approximate attempt to estimate losses based on the results of the war by analogy with the wars of past years. It turns out that from the ratio of relative losses (called up / lost) in wars with a similar devastating finale, the Soviet Union by no means could lose more than 30% more Germans.

                      There is still such a study: http://www.poteryww2.narod.ru/

                      The total number of such formations Wikipedia is 1,8 million.


                      Considering the number of prisoners of non-German nationality only captured by the Red Army, I do not see anything surprising in this; for Poland itself, the German army lost about 120k people killed by the EMNIP, and only 60k were killed from the Germans who fought against the Germans.

                      The online article "Russian Collaborationists in World War II" refers to 2 million non-German Wehrmacht volunteers. However, it also states that 1,5% of them were recruited on the territory of the USSR.


                      Well, since the article is only about Russian collaborators, the number is quite adequate even if this collaborator was forcibly taken by a Khivi who was not given weapons, and ran away as soon as possible.
                      1. yurta2013
                        yurta2013 19 May 2013 17: 16
                        -2
                        Quote: Avenger711
                        Bullshit these calculations. There are no official sound analyzes of German losses.

                        It is the calculations, that is, statistics, that underlie any objective research, and not at all their own speculative reasoning. The German archives certainly suffered during the war, but not to the extent that the Germans could not determine the size of their own army and the number of losses. The punctuality of the Germans has long been known. In any case, we are still far from them in this respect. Hiding genuine numbers would be foolish for them. After all, they fought not only against the USSR. The British, French and Americans would have long ago taken them to clean water.
                        By the way, I made a mistake in my calculations by including 1 million German soldiers who died in captivity in the number of people killed in battles. Thus, the Germans themselves lost not 3, but 2 million people killed with us, and with the Allies, a little more than 2,5 million.
                      2. Setrac
                        Setrac 19 May 2013 18: 34
                        +1
                        Quote: yurta2013
                        By the way, I made a mistake in my calculations by including 1 million German soldiers who died in captivity in the number of people killed in battles. Thus, the Germans themselves lost not 3, but 2 million people killed with us, and with the Allies, a little more than 2,5 million.

                        Yes, it's all rubbish! 2.5-3 million were knocked out only in the first year of the war.
                      3. Avenger711
                        Avenger711 19 May 2013 19: 55
                        0
                        The headquarters had statistics, but propaganda was already manipulating it. The punctuality of the Germans is a myth, but if we talk about losses, then for the 45th year, in general, there is no information. In any case, with losses of 2 million, you can’t explain why Germany lost 80 million outright, and at the last gasp, it no longer had a draft contingent.
                        A. Isaev in my blog once threw me a scan of a German table with corpses until 1945. Actually in his books, he uses this info. There are already 2.7kk corpses, and 2.3 million German soldiers are buried in the territory of the USSR. But there was still the beating of the 45th and 300 thousand dead in Soviet captivity. 4 million killed only Germans and only on the eastern front is the number from which it generally makes sense to speak on this topic. The losses of the German allies, by the way, are about 800 thousand. These are not some Vlasovites, or volunteers from France, namely, regular units sent by independent governments of countries like Italy or Finland.

                        And I don’t believe in fairy tales about 160k killed for the 41st, then hell was drained from Moscow.
                      4. Alex
                        Alex 21 August 2013 19: 06
                        +2
                        Quote: yurta2013
                        The punctuality of the Germans has long been known.

                        And also their eyewash. The "successes" of the Luftwaffe (numerically) are quite indicative.
                2. Avenger711
                  Avenger711 19 May 2013 13: 44
                  +3
                  Could kill up to 10 million. Actually. German official statements about losses are generally ridiculous, in particular, for the 41st they have only 800 losses of all types officially, this was easily blocked by the army of the reserve of more than a million, and the wounded already started to leave hospitals in the summer by autumn, but the front fell in December , and generals talk about companies of 25 people.
              2. Avenger711
                Avenger711 19 May 2013 13: 40
                +1
                7 Million is the least likely number of those killed, the total resource of men of draft age at the beginning of the war in Germany was about 20 million people, as a result 75% of men were called up. But another 3.6 million during the war grew up, but by the 45th 16-year-olds had already been driven to the front. 15 million were already killed, or captured, or completely unfit for service after being wounded.
          2. smile
            smile 18 May 2013 16: 29
            +3
            yurta2013
            What do you dislike? There is no strangeness, because, as we constantly hitlerites and his friends .. how to say it — we reduced it, and quickly enough — so we had to be unfortunate to replenish our annihilated contingents ... if we would not have effectively contributed to a decrease in the number of armies of the Hitler European Union, then they would gladly increase their numbers ... but we killed them somewhat faster than they managed to form, train and equip new applicants for living spaces ...
          3. d.gksueyjd
            d.gksueyjd 18 May 2013 19: 05
            +4
            Quote: yurta2013
            that Germany attacked 1941 million people to attack the USSR in 4,6, according to official figures?
            You yourself noticed Germany, but in addition to the countries that fought on its side, there were also volunteers: French, Poles, Belgians, and so on. Since the beginning of the war with the USSR, its ranks have replenished: Benderaites, Baltic volunteers, Crimean Tatars, traitors, etc. Even if they did not take direct part in the front, they allowed Germany not to distract a decent part of their troops: to guard, police operations, etc.
        2. washi
          washi 18 May 2013 15: 30
          12
          Israel still sucks Germany: the Holocaust. Where is the massacre of the Slavs? Where is the compensation? And not only from Germany, but also from other countries. Everything is documented. Where are our complaints?
        3. d.gksueyjd
          d.gksueyjd 18 May 2013 18: 56
          +7
          You wrote about those countries that fought against the USSR, but there was another main material ally - the United States! Now, when the United States has just begun to remove secrecy from the documents of World War II, even their partial publication indicates that money does not smell for "democratic ideals"!
          USA since 1933 by 1954 helped Germany financially.
      5. yurta2013
        yurta2013 18 May 2013 13: 50
        12 th
        Poland definitely did not participate in the war against the USSR, as it was occupied by Germany. By mobilization, Poles from the western parts of Poland annexed to the Reich could participate. The same applies to the Luxembourgers (included in the Reich), the Czechs (the Sudetenland is annexed to Germany), the French (Alsace and Lorraine are annexed to Germany) and, apparently, the Belgians and Danes. The number of volunteers is also highly questionable.
        1. Babon
          Babon 18 May 2013 14: 03
          +9
          No, they gave you some pretty well-known facts. And there are some facts about the SS. "Charlemagne" very stubbornly resisted, it was even harder to defeat them than the Germans. Indeed, there were many volunteers in the ranks of the Wehrmacht, over there in Sweden and they do not hide that they had a lot of fascists. The Spanish "blue division", in the opinion of the Germans, showed itself worthily on the eastern front. My grandfather told me that a lot of Hungarians fought, and they were distinguished by their cruelty. And the Romanians were also very cruel to the civilian population, but he did not particularly remember the Romanians, they could only mock the unarmed well. Here the Hungarians are a different matter.
          1. yurta2013
            yurta2013 18 May 2013 16: 25
            -3
            Division Charlemagne, if I remember correctly, was formed only in the middle of 1945. Before that, it seems from the end of 1944 there was such a brigade. The division became after the French collaborators joined it, who stumbled along with the Germans from France when the allies came there. From 1941 to 1944, only one regiment of French SS men fought with us, and even that most of this time was used against the partisans in Belarus. As for the rest of the volunteers, the word "many" is too loose. For some countries, even 100 people is a lot.
            1. Babon
              Babon 19 May 2013 02: 40
              0
              The Charlemagne Division, if I remember correctly, was formed only in the middle of 1945
              Well, in the middle of the 45th))) It’s like we won Germacy, we don’t have to lie that way)) At that time, the Soviet army was encircling a million Japanese people and landing in the Kuril Islands, well, to take a million soldiers prisoner, this was once It was? Are you still going to argue?
              1. yurta2013
                yurta2013 19 May 2013 10: 34
                0
                Quote: Babon
                The Charlemagne Division, if I remember correctly, was formed only in the middle of 1945; Well, in the middle of the 45th))) It’s like we won Hermia’s, we don’t have to lie so much))

                No need to cling to random typos. Of course, not in the middle, but in the first months of 1945. It seems in February or April.
                1. Babon
                  Babon 19 May 2013 10: 43
                  0
                  Yuri, well, so you yourself do not give any reasons, but you didn’t accidentally write, and if someone is misled then it will be?
        2. washi
          washi 18 May 2013 15: 38
          +5
          The number of volunteers is underestimated. Not everyone was taken. TK, the military of these countries showed weak resistance. Therefore, they took only civilians. The military were offended. And, like, they began to spit after the invaders.
          In the territory of the Reich, there were those killed, but they were mainly killed by the Russians.
          Psheki. .one AK how many of ours killed. And who are they for?
          1. yurta2013
            yurta2013 18 May 2013 16: 28
            -8
            Did you just tell a fresh joke? As for the AK (if you mean the Craiova Army in Poland), then really, its soldiers may have also been counted among our prisoners in the war.
            1. smile
              smile 18 May 2013 18: 28
              +3
              yurta2013
              I repeat for those who were not considered bandits from the AK as soldiers in the tank, we were not officially at war with people selected by the British who were called the Polish government in exile .... therefore, the Akovtsy were just bandits and Nazi accomplices - well, considering their actions are obvious to everyone who was helped by their sabotage on ways to supply our troops that liberated Poland from the Nazis .... and no one in the prisoners of the Akovtsy had ever been counted as prisoners and they weren’t taken into account as prisoners ... well, really, you don’t understand, like not ?
              1. yurta2013
                yurta2013 19 May 2013 10: 12
                -1
                In fact, guerrillas can be considered partisans only on their territory. In a foreign country, our troops could consider resistance units at war with them as allies of the Germans and, accordingly, their prisoners could also be considered prisoners of war. By the way, in Poland, besides the AK, there were even more nationalist underground armed groups (several thousand people), some of which, when our troops entered Poland, were blocked with the Germans and participated in battles with us as SS troops.
        3. smile
          smile 18 May 2013 16: 39
          +3
          yurta2013
          The Polish government from London declared war on us in October 39. In Ukraine and Belarus, they launched, using ramified agents and sending sabotage groups, a real sabotage war, which we had to cope with for several months - well. until the bandits were transferred ... that is why those 120 thousand prisoners of the 39th year that we didn’t have time to dissipate by that time (out of 450 thousand) we held back, releasing them only when the Poles in London were ordered to stop yapping at us ... But what we see further - during the war we in the composition of the Wehrmacht captured another 60 thousand Poles ... and even so. that since the age of 42, the record card of a prisoner of war for a captured Pole who expressed a desire to go to the Polish Army did not start ... Think about it - only 60 thousand were captured! (bandits from AK were not considered to be prisoners of war, but we also scored and scored thousands of them) ... Yes, we had only 48 thousand Italians captured ... therefore, more of Italians fought against us in the Wehrmacht than Italians ... and much ....
          1. d.gksueyjd
            d.gksueyjd 18 May 2013 20: 16
            0
            Do you know the size of the rifle division? So how many divisions of the Poles fought (arithmetic 3class)?
            1. smile
              smile 18 May 2013 22: 20
              +1
              d.gksueyjd (3)
              I do not quite understand your question - please specify ..
              If the Poles themselves acknowledge, moreover, being modest. that they had more than a million soldiers under arms, but in fact much more, despite the fact that according to their plans, with the general mobilization and deployment of their army should have been 3 million soldiers .. then ...?
              further .. I see that in matters of military development, you did not want to study further than third grade ... :))) well. so it’s your misfortune ... or do you think that the armed forces can be established numerically simply by multiplying the nominal strength of the division by their number? !!! :)))) .. well, right - there’s a limit to everything .... I understand that you are not digging an ear, but as a hint, compare the strength of the invading army (you can only Germans) with the number of their divisions ( you only mentioned the divisions yourself, right?:)))) ... then scratch the back of your head and think about how you got the extra million and a half soldiers :))) ... and even better, take the WHOLE Wehrmacht on June 22 and divide by the number of all its DIVISIONS ... there will be much more extra millions .... well, and then you can go to the fourth grade with a clear conscience ... :)))
          2. yurta2013
            yurta2013 19 May 2013 10: 25
            -3
            I advise you to read the article "Russian Collaborators in World War II" on the Internet. It says that in Poland the Germans mobilized 2 thousand people into the German army. They served only in auxiliary and security forces, most often on the territory of Poland and Germany itself. Naturally, most of them were not eager to fight for great Germany, and tried to get captured as quickly as possible. Let's add to them the prisoners captured in the battles of our army with the detachments of Polish nationalists and we will get the desired result. The Germans did not have any combat units from the Poles in their army.
        4. brelok
          brelok 19 May 2013 06: 31
          +2
          Why are you surprised? You always love to rob and kill in Europe! Napoleon calculated that in 1812 he lost no more than 100000 Frenchmen. The invasion army was 650000 men. Hitler had the same thing! They won’t be surprised about the Poles: they didn’t see the more vile prostitutes! They saw nothing because of their gentry pride beyond its nose. Poland from the Oder to Smolensk is the dream of the Poles of that time.
          1. yurta2013
            yurta2013 19 May 2013 10: 03
            -1
            Could you share the information where you found Napoleon’s statement about 100 thousand Frenchmen lost by him in Russia?
            1. Babon
              Babon 19 May 2013 10: 37
              +1
              In reality, Napoleon entered Russia with 650 army, but it turned out somewhere around 000. Napoleon had a motley army. 35 is just the French. I advise you to look for articles about the collaboration of France, and how cruel the French themselves did to them, and even they simply forgot these people, as if they were not there. You are all here trying to find something, but in France they simply forgot and don’t remember these people, it’s just that the power is the winner now.
              1. tomket
                tomket 19 May 2013 11: 59
                +1
                so we need to remind them))) why are the Vlasovites remembered and they are not?)))) Yes, and Keitel's words should be put up on a poster over the Eiffel Tower: "And this we also lost?" and then some people get dizzy from phantom victories.
              2. yurta2013
                yurta2013 19 May 2013 17: 03
                0
                I hope this is not Napoleon’s article on collaboration on the Internet.
          2. Alex
            Alex 21 August 2013 19: 15
            +2
            Quote: brelok
            Poland from Oder to Smolensk is the dream of the Poles of that time.

            And the current one, too.
        5. tomket
          tomket 19 May 2013 11: 54
          +2
          Poland wanted to parade along the Red Square with the Snemmers, but it’s bad luck, Hitler didn’t want to Poland as an ally
        6. Avenger711
          Avenger711 19 May 2013 14: 12
          +1
          Of course, a non-existent state could not participate, but the population of this territory is quite.
      6. Corneli
        Corneli 18 May 2013 20: 12
        +1
        Quote: Atlon
        the Poles surrendered 60280, the French 23136, the Croats 21822, the Dutch 4729, the Belgians 2010, the Luxembourg 1652, the Danes 456, several thousand Czechs. This is only a fraction of several European countries that seem to have not fought against the USSR.

        The figures for Luxembourg are especially impressive! Considering that in total there were as many as 12 thousand people called up from there, 3 of whom managed to "evade". In general, it is strange that you put it here (and in the comments below you come across) - a dwarf state, before the Second World War not having an army at all! Germany captured them (the government fled) and annexed ... the mandatory call to the front was precisely Germany.
        P.S. At the moment, Luxembourg has an army of as many as 1.5 thousand people (by the way in NATO !!!) and they have as many as half a million people
        1. Alex
          Alex 21 August 2013 19: 17
          +2
          As far as I know, the Germans equalized the Luxembourgers with the Germans in Rekh and rightfully recognized their Aryanism.
    2. Atlon
      Atlon 18 May 2013 10: 39
      +6
      Quote: Uhalus
      Well, I started as I could. And really very unprepared.

      By belittling Hitler, the author belittles the significance of our victory!
      1. smile
        smile 18 May 2013 16: 43
        -1
        Atlon
        Hello! Only an excerpt of the book is given here, because it may seem that the author belittles it ... if you read the whole book, you can make sure that there is no question of any belittling ... although, of course, some of the author’s conclusions are indisputable ... but I would I would advise you to read this book ...
        1. tomket
          tomket 19 May 2013 12: 11
          0
          Quotes from the Bible, in isolation from the text itself, can convince people that Christ is the main Satanist. only by name at the end did he realize that the main idea was that Hitler was a puppet in someone’s hands. but this is definitely not the hands of Deladier, Chamberlin or Cherchel, and even Roosevelt is not particularly suitable for the role of a puppeteer. Most likely, one should look at the activities of various groups such as the Masons among industrial and financial magnates, if I am not mistaken, some did not stop working with the Germans during the war , up to the point that private tankers refueled German submarines with fuel in the ocean. Well, the fact that European factories of American centers working on Hitler formation b-17 carefully avoided ....
      2. tomket
        tomket 19 May 2013 12: 01
        +1
        walking along the path of rezun and reducing everything to numbers, the author forgets that the blitz krieg strategy, while in terms of importance and effect on the battlefield, was comparable to the use of nuclear weapons. Well, there were no effective techniques against tank groups.
      3. Skavron
        Skavron 19 May 2013 12: 12
        0
        Quote: Atlon
        By belittling Hitler, the author belittles the significance of our victory!

        Is it good to magnify the possessed one without reason?
      4. Uhalus
        Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 36
        0
        In no case do not belittle. The German army was able to fight, and to crush such a beast - I don’t know who should be ... Russian, probably :)
        Another thing is that the Germans at the border got just a golden prize - huge trophies.
        1. tomket
          tomket 20 May 2013 00: 10
          0
          The British special forces in Iraq also got a golden prize-warehouse with shoes)))) They scored with these boots of Saddam, that’s the question))))))
      5. Uhalus
        Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 47
        0
        Sorry, I entered the wrong answer ... I repeat.
        In no case do not belittle. The German army was able to fight, and to crush such a beast - I don’t know who should be ... Russian, probably :)
        Another thing is that the Germans at the border got just a golden prize - huge trophies.
    3. Hudo
      Hudo 18 May 2013 10: 47
      +8
      Quote: Uhalus
      And what could he do?


      Reason? They brought you polonium, if you please, have a bite.
      1. Uhalus
        Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 37
        0
        Not Rezun. Read carefully.
    4. Babon
      Babon 18 May 2013 12: 19
      +5
      Well then, let’s recall the plans of the General Staffs of England and France, how they were going to attack the USSR. Let us recall the statements of Western politicians of those years. There was nothing good about our country. Why not create a strong army if aggressive speeches constantly came from the west? Maybe now we will also argue why we need so many tanks? Does this mean our country is preparing to attack someone? Tired of exaggerating this topic. A big country, a lot of technology is needed, it is a necessity to protect.
      1. smile
        smile 18 May 2013 16: 56
        +3
        Babon
        Exactly! ... let's remember that on May 10 of the 40th, England occupied a neutral, armyless Iceland, almost managed to occupy Norway and Sweden, spit on their neutrality and on their treaties with these countries ... Churchill in September 39 years old, calling for the occupation of Scandinavia he wrote the following:
        Our conscience is the supreme judge. We strive to restore the rule of law and protect the freedom of small countries ...
        We have the right - moreover, God commands us to temporarily discard the conditional provisions of the laws, which we seek to strengthen and restore. Small countries should not bind our hands when we fight for their rights and freedoms. We must not allow the letter of the law to stand in the way of those who are called upon to protect and implement it at an hour of formidable danger ...
        How do you declare? I especially liked it - God commands us .. (Goth mit oz?:)))) ... and the fact that it is Britain called up to implement the LAW (meaning international) Justice of the peace, Abanamat .......
        What, someone else has a conscience after such an honest statement yapping at the USSR?
        1. d.gksueyjd
          d.gksueyjd 18 May 2013 20: 21
          +2
          Countries that did not have their own armies had mattresses which were absolutely necessary for Germany to attack the USSR.
          1. smile
            smile 18 May 2013 22: 30
            +1
            d.gksueyjd
            No one will argue that they had quite material reasons for the invasion ... by the way, for reference, Iceland was taken not because of resources, but because of its strategic position ... but I talked about that. that in violation of all international norms and treaties, the British seized or surrendered to Hitler any country, just as well. like Hitler (this truth, he didn’t give up anything - he took everything) while shouting out what kind of democracy they were, and if they grab someone and kill a little bit, it’s for the good of those killed .... well, everything’s like now .. .:)))) ... and these little people who surrendered ALL countries, to whom half of their allies surrendered, violated almost all international treaties concluded by their countries, and our bastards who sing along to them have the audacity to show us something when Stalin didn’t violate a single international treaty with any country? ... water in the oblast is wonderful ....
    5. skeptic-
      skeptic- 18 May 2013 15: 03
      +4
      Quote: Uhalus
      And what could he do? England is crushing on the one hand, on the other, the USSR is preparing for liberation ... (we had preparation for war — on the territory of the enemy, with little blood, a mighty blow, that is, a surprise attack). Well, I started as I could. And really very unprepared.


      A little differently. The plans of the world capitalist mafia did not include the preservation of Hitler as a world dictator. Hitler had to destroy the USSR, at the same time lose all his armies. After this, the Anglo-American were to enter and finish off the seriously wounded opponents, having finished off both fascism and socialism at the same time. Therefore, Hitler and trampled upon not quite prepared, since the mafia promised him full provision with the necessary. The theatrical capture of Europe (a duck for the USSR), in its essence, was a guarantee to Hitler that the world mafia would support him. And this is including the transfer of heaps of military factories throughout Europe. Support for England and America, the USSR, was forced. Hitler and Stalin had to deplete their human reserves as much as possible, so they supported both sides. The second front is access to the starting line, the destruction of weakened opponents and a more painless seizure of the entire Eurasian continent.

      Well, who would have thought that Stalin would not only defeat Hitler, but also retain significant and very efficient forces. This led to the collapse of the "INCREASIBLE" plan.
      1. nevopros
        nevopros 18 May 2013 16: 03
        +3
        We also translate the plan as "IMPOSSIBLE". Prepared in Denmark approx. 10 Wehrmacht divisions taken prisoner. They were glad to surrender to the "allies" - from the east they smelled of revenge.
      2. Uhalus
        Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 33
        0
        Another point of view - I agree. And not far from mine, differences in particulars.
      3. Alex
        Alex 21 August 2013 19: 28
        +2
        World international politics is akin to a poker game. Players constantly bluff, change plans and strategies, juggle cards (if possible), raise bets or play a partner. In that game, which was played out in Europe, starting from 1939, in general, rates changed with the speed of a kaleidoscope. Yesterday's enemies became allies (at least on paper), allies betrayed each other (Poland is a prime example of state treason), deceit and self-deception are common. So today to understand the intricacies of international politics of that time is not an easy task. So there is no need for hasty conclusions and lightweight statements.

        There are many in the world, a friend of Horatio, such
        Which does not immediately come to mind
        (almost Shakespeare).
    6. dievleha
      dievleha 18 May 2013 15: 04
      +3
      Why are you bleached? The war in Finland, the liberation campaign in Poland, the reorganization that began and the increase revealed so many problems for the Red Army that only the madman who Stalin was clearly not the first to start a war with Europe, A minus article
      1. Babon
        Babon 18 May 2013 15: 37
        +2
        dievleha
        And now, without any trips to Europe, we study the actions of politicians. It’s not tanks that drive or planes bombing, it’s not so interesting, I understand. Germany was an ordinary country after the Versailles Peace Treaty, everything was done to strengthen Germany, all Germany was forgiven. gave money to them. One question, for what? It was clear that Hitler was creating a strong army. maybe in the history of the second world from 1933 we begin to look, and not from 1939?
    7. washi
      washi 18 May 2013 15: 24
      0
      He, poor, and attacked England to conclude an alliance.
      1. skeptic-
        skeptic- 18 May 2013 17: 43
        0
        Quote: Vasya
        He, poor, and attacked England to conclude an alliance.


        Like Pearl Harbor, like the Reichstag, like many other examples in History when you need to veil your specific goal - any means are good. Especially if the goal is a common one.
        1. tomket
          tomket 19 May 2013 12: 15
          0
          puppeteers did not sit in London, otherwise the British empire itself would not have disappeared after the war, and Pearl Harbor ... As Washington seemed to say: "the tree of democracy must sometimes be watered with the blood of patriots."
    8. smile
      smile 18 May 2013 16: 23
      -1
      Uhalus
      You read a book ... shame on you, of course it won’t, but beware then retelling the impudent lies of Rezunov ....
      I'm serious - read it, we read the rezun to make sure that in his propaganda opuses there is not a single word of truth ... NOT ONE!
      1. Uhalus
        Uhalus 19 May 2013 23: 49
        +1
        Well, what are you ... I read, of course. Only once again I repeat: this is not Rezun! Does it really seem that you are attached to him?
      2. Alex
        Alex 21 August 2013 19: 33
        +2
        Lord, why did Rezun give you so much. He’s lying, so debunk him. I am not his supporter, but so far, apart from emotions, I have not seen anything against him. And the lower the level of criticism, the more emotions. Which, however, is natural.
    9. Gladiatir-zlo
      Gladiatir-zlo 19 May 2013 12: 33
      0
      Gentlemen, but the Nazis were not going to fight according to the rules of this stink. There is a gorgeous work, and about when the "world war began. There is neither from the capture of Poland, but from the almost peaceful Anschluss of Austria, there was such an episode, and from the release of their Versailles agreement. So the book clearly shows that the Nazis first of all waged a new war type, against a society ready to panic and hysteria.
    10. Old_kapitan
      Old_kapitan 20 May 2013 09: 33
      0
      We had preparation for war - on the territory of the enemy, with little blood, a mighty blow, i.e. surprise attack
      All is correct. In the infantry fighting charter there was not even a defense as a type of battle. But! Not with a surprise attack, but IF IT IS ATTACKED, we will drive the enemy into its territory, and there we will crush it. Which they did. Unfortunately, little blood did not work. But powerful blows were pressed!
  2. Army1
    Army1 18 May 2013 12: 26
    +5
    To be honest, he did not even consider the Soviet Union a worthy adversary. From history: he planned to go to the Arkhangelsk-Astrakhan border, he would not take the whole union and did not plan. And there they are already crowding out the English colonies. In general, I feel that there was some kind of agreement at the highest levels, well, at least tell me, and all the wars are all @@ but, which has been going on for a thousand years, all this is against Russia, it doesn’t matter to the Russian Empire, the USSR, or the Russian Federation.
  3. washi
    washi 18 May 2013 15: 22
    -2
    The plans were to quickly reach the line Arkhangelsk - Astrakhan. For the winter, troops are being withdrawn. This is even in Rezun, reflected in one of the books.
    1. Alex
      Alex 21 August 2013 19: 36
      +2
      This is where you read about Rezun’s exit. In fact, he was mocking more and more that Hitler would have just had to pull troops out of the USSR for the winter. Well, after that he made far-reaching conclusions.

      And the withdrawal of troops from the seized territory with the success of the military campaign - when did this happen in history?
  4. builder
    builder 18 May 2013 22: 28
    0
    Winter uniform 1942
  5. Selevc
    Selevc 19 May 2013 10: 50
    -1
    God, what a cute nonsense !!! You might think that by the winter of 41, all of Europe captured by Hitler was not able to provide the German army with winter clothes ??? !!! This is another myth about the war !!! Reading some modern opuses on the topic of war, one would think that the German leadership consisted entirely of morons who did not understand that after the fall in Russia there is winter and this winter is very cold ...

    I think the real thing is that the Wehrmacht had a winter form - but this form was designed for European winter and not in the cold -40 in any way !!! Hitler demanded an offensive from his generals at the end of the 41st - it was already close at hand ... But the weather clearly let us down - in the cold of -40 - it is incredibly difficult to simply dig a trench without even talking about the construction of more serious fortifications ... in the cold, a person cannot be outdoors for a long time - and no matter how much he warms himself, you freeze anyway ... In the field, at such a low temperature, it is very risky to spend the night - you may not wake up !!! Further - at such a low temperature it is difficult even to fight - since the hands freeze to metal, the gun grease thickens, and the equipment fails ... Hence the Wehrmacht’s difficulties in that situation and, as a result, many non-combat losses of people and equipment !!!
    1. Alex
      Alex 21 August 2013 19: 44
      +1
      This is what the real nonsense is about the current attempts to justify Hitler and his would-be strategists in hindsight. Didn't they have a hydrometeorological center? Or could they not have foreseen the changes in the weather? The stupid and bloody Stalin made a conclusion after the Winter War with its anomalous frosts. And Hitler? Everyone chuckled at the trampling of the Red Army in Finland? And okay 1941, can be attributed to sloppiness and shortsightedness. And 1942? In Stalingrad, the Germans froze to death, Paulus's memoirs describe this colorfully. Yes, and ours have these pictures of columns of living corpses for a long time in the memory. I am generally silent about lubricant and fuel, which froze and stratified. As well as about the chess suspension "Panthers" and "Tigers", which was clogged with mud, too. It seems that the German planners were from the same cohort as the Soviet technologists: they created SOVIET furniture that did not fit into SOVIET apartments.
      And at the same time, all these justifiers forget the simple truth: one of the stages of the preparation of the war is the study of the theater of the upcoming military operations. This is what Sun Tzu knew.
  6. tomket
    tomket 19 May 2013 11: 34
    +2
    Did you even catch a glimpse of the Barbarossa plan, 7 what kind of winter hostilities are they talking about? Why are you bothering the rezun? Sometimes turn on your head! The meaning of Blitz Krieg is precisely in a quick war, which did not involve a large expenditure of resources. in general, the Germans were beggars, they had the famous black SS cloaks and dermantina, and the uniform was mouse-colored, not because the Germans really liked the color so much, but because the fabric was based on nettle fiber! And you are in winter uniform, getting ready! they were homeless after the First World War, the last in Europe.
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 19 May 2013 11: 51
      +2
      Quote: tomket
      In general, the Germans were starving, the SS cloaks were famous for black and they had dermantine, and the shape was of a mouse color, not because the Germans liked the color so much, but because the fabric was based on nettle fiber! And you winter uniform, getting ready! after the First World War they were the last in Europe.

      Just do not need to represent Germany and Western Europe as a whole with a bunch of Holodroots !!! Given the production capabilities of Europe, it is difficult to imagine that this very Europe is not able to sew at least half a million winter fur coats and warm shoes !!! Yes, why sew if all the army warehouses of European countries were at the disposal of Hitler !!!
      Did you even catch a glimpse of the Barbarossa plan, 7 what kind of winter hostilities are they talking about? Why are you shuffling the rezun?
      Have you heard about Operation Typhoon? In fact, it was already planned for the fall of 41 and this has nothing to do with Barbarossa's plan ... And in fact, autumn in the climatic conditions of Russia can be very cold - were the Germans really so stupid not to know?
      1. tomket
        tomket 19 May 2013 12: 32
        +1
        When the Barbarossa operation was planned in 40, Pauls apparently didn’t think about fighting before the fall. The typhoon operation is a consequence of the failures of the Barbarossa plan, did the Germans have to abandon your war? But why didn’t your stocks of vast European warehouses appear near Stalingrad? And what kind of woman’s clothes were sent to the front? Is Hitler lacked the spirit to requisition property ??? Could incidentally borrow from the same Norwegians. But in the chronicle, for some reason, the Germans are wandering with their legs wrapped in straw and wrapped in female shawls ....
        1. Selevc
          Selevc 19 May 2013 12: 51
          +1
          Quote: tomket
          Operation Typhoon is a consequence of the failures of the Barbarossa plan

          What failures are you talking about if the troops of the Red Army opposing the Army Groups Center and South were completely defeated !!! If Zhukov himself in his famous interview says that by the beginning of October 41st there was simply no one to defend Moscow !!! Militia groups were hastily organized, cadets, police, etc. were called to the front. But such unfired units could not stop the enemy for a long time ...
          Quote: tomket
          But in the chronicle, for some reason, the Germans are wandering with their legs wrapped in straw and wrapped in female shawls ...

          These are shots of the end of autumn - the beginning of winter of the 41st ... I already wrote that the German army was not ready for frosts -30-40 degrees ... Note all the Germans in the video in usually a coat - this is their winter uniform - only this form is suitable for the European winter - up to -10 degrees - not lower ...
          1. Selevc
            Selevc 19 May 2013 13: 23
            +1
            Here is a typical example of a German winter uniform ... By the way, it is very comfortable in shape but with small frosts down to -15 ... The German wore a winter coat and warm winter trousers primarily because it was possible to put on a mask and move around the snowdrifts in such winter clothes it’s more convenient than in a fur coat and felt boots ... They usually did not wear warm earflaps because they could put a helmet on top of a small cap or cap that at least somehow protected the soldier’s head from ricocheting bullets, fragments and any flying debris from near explosions ... Winter boots are lighter and more comfortable than boots ...

            But all this uniform is suitable for weather conditions of -10 -15, but not at all -30-40 degrees below zero ... That's why the Wehrmacht screwed up with the weather ...
            1. yurta2013
              yurta2013 20 May 2013 17: 57
              +1
              In fact, the Germans began to receive this winter uniform in droves after retreating from Moscow. This is clearly stated in the memoirs of Guderian. According to him, winter clothes were sent to the troops in November, but for the most part they got stuck in traffic jams somewhere in Poland and on the border of the USSR (weapons and ammunition were considered priority cargoes). Therefore, in December, the Germans fought near Moscow, still mostly in autumn clothes.
          2. tomket
            tomket 19 May 2013 14: 54
            0
            The failure of the Barbaross plan is not the fulfillment of the main goal of defeat and the end of the war with the USSR.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. svp67
                svp67 19 May 2013 17: 17
                0
                Quote: Sun-faced
                It would be better to defeat. There would not be this cult of victory and wiped off now.
                That would be all, but in German, but perhaps you weren’t there, and certainly you would only dream about the Internet, if you even heard about it ...
              2. tomket
                tomket 20 May 2013 00: 14
                0
                and you probably really want to be a Lampshade, and give everyone light on the sun)))
          3. Alex
            Alex 21 August 2013 20: 23
            +2
            Selevc (1)
            Oh, just admit your licking to the Wehrmacht, and then all! To deny the obvious - I saw this in 2004-mna Maidan, I ate too much to nausea. Once again - ignorance of ALL the features of the upcoming theater - this is strategic stupidity and unpreparedness for war. I can imagine how you and your kind would be hungry if this happened to us. Yes, you do it already.
        2. Alex
          Alex 21 August 2013 20: 17
          +2
          Quote: tomket (1)
          But in the chronicle, for some reason, the Germans are wandering with their legs wrapped in straw and wrapped in female shawls ....

          But this is a fact. And the facts, as you know, are stubborn things ...
      2. yurta2013
        yurta2013 20 May 2013 18: 01
        +1
        Barbarossa’s operation was planned for October, at worst for November, but not for December. Neither Hitler nor his generals could have imagined such a length of operation even in a nightmare.
        1. yurta2013
          yurta2013 20 May 2013 18: 40
          0
          Quote: yurta2013
          Operation Barbarossa planned for October

          Sorry, made a reservation. Of course, not Barbarossa, but Typhoon.
        2. Alex
          Alex 21 August 2013 20: 26
          +2
          Which once again speaks about their "scrupulous" planning of the war with the USSR.
      3. Alex
        Alex 21 August 2013 20: 15
        +2
        Quote: Selevc (1)
        And actually, autumn in the climatic conditions of Russia can be very cold - were the Germans really so dumb to not know?

        This is really one of the real mysteries of the war. This is probably a prime example of the primacy of politics over professionalism.
    2. Skavron
      Skavron 19 May 2013 12: 16
      0
      Quote: tomket
      The meaning of Blitz Krieg is precisely in a quick war

      and what kind of quick war can we speak on the territory of the USSR ???
      This is not France ...
      At least teach geography or open a map.
      And it turned out that the Germans could fight only if our troops did not stand on the defensive, where they stood on the defensive, the German car skidded and suffered terrible losses.
      1. Selevc
        Selevc 19 May 2013 12: 34
        0
        Quote: Skavron
        and what kind of quick war can we speak on the territory of the USSR ??? This is not France ... At least teach geography or open a map.

        :)))))) The war began on June 22nd and on July 16th the Germans were already standing near Smolensk !!! Where is even faster ??? Take a ruler and measure the distance from the western borders of the USSR to Smolensk - the Germans captured the vast territory of the USSR in less than a month !!!
        These events can hardly be called anything other than "Military catastrophe" !!!
        1. Alex
          Alex 21 August 2013 20: 30
          +2
          Quote: Selevc (1)
          The war began on the 22 of June and on the 16 of July the Germans were already at Smolensk !!! Where is even faster ??? Take a ruler and measure the distance from the western borders of the USSR to Smolensk - the Germans captured the vast territory of the USSR in less than a month !!!

          Napoleon moved even faster, and finished on the island of Elba. However, Aloizievich was even less fortunate: a hole in the backyard is a worthy end to the head of the millennial Reich.
      2. tomket
        tomket 19 May 2013 12: 54
        0
        A - What is such a deaf defense? The Brest Fortress became defensive, but what did it matter strategically? The sense of the deaf defense of some sort of division, if a tank group slipped in another place and goes to Minsk? Do you remember from the memoirs of the same Zimin that in 41 the main task was to search for the accumulation of tanks and tank columns? This is just to determine the direction of impact, for the subsequent deployment of the barrier in this area. About monstrous losses, what are such losses? The fact that the Germans were sometimes crushed by the number of troops encircled is yes, but there must be at least a little resistance in the boiler, which by the end of the 41 of the year was practically absent. And by the way, if you give an example of the fight against the blitz krieg defense near Kursk, there was no blitz krieg there , there was a usual offensive combined-arms operation, comparable, for example, with the battle of Verdun, to the blitz krieg, well, not at all sideways. P, S. Rezun is not knowledge.
    3. Alex
      Alex 21 August 2013 19: 53
      +2
      Quote: tomket
      The meaning of Blitz Krieg is precisely in a quick war, which did not involve a large expenditure of resources.

      Blitzkrieg, as it provides for a large expenditure of resources, both material and human. That is why it consists of three phases: relatively long preparation (accumulation and concentration of forces and means), a fleeting military campaign (without account of losses), and subsequent restoration of the accumulation of forces for further aggression.
      Germany, with its limited resources, could not have a different military strategy. The war of attrition, and even against the coalition, she never pulled out.
  7. Uhe
    Uhe 19 May 2013 19: 06
    -3
    Yes, he was not a swindler. He attacked the USSR precisely in the 41st for several reasons. Yes, Germany should have been completely ready for war somewhere in the 43rd, like the USSR, by the way :) But the British convinced Hitler that the USSR had no means to fight Germany, we had only 1 defense line (instead 3). But most importantly, Hitler counted on the betrayal of the highest Red Army, and even Zhukov and Khrushchev were involved in the plot there. He also relied on the Leninist guard, ready to raise a second rebellion during the German attack (the first rebellion was raised by Trotsky in the 29th). That is, the generals were supposed to let Hitler go to Moscow, Hitler had to come to Moscow in the warm season, and there various options had already come into play.

    In turn, the British convinced Hitler that they would not enter the war on the side of the USSR, but Hitler should not attack England in order to try to break his promises when he came to power with the help of Britain. They convinced him that Britain had far more troops than it had, and that he could not conquer the island. Of course, all negotiations were conducted through Ges. Hitler's task was one of several that would burn out: the creation of the European Union (it turned out, that's why Europe did not particularly resist), the destruction of the USSR (did not work), the destruction of Germany (did not work thanks to Stalin), the destruction of the USSR and Germany (did not work).

    Canaris worked for the British - that’s the thing :) It was he who drove Hitler by the nose for the sake of fulfilling the goals of Britain (the Englishwoman spares, huh :)) You can listen or read more, for example, at Fursov and Marterosyan.

    What is the genius of Stalin? He just beat Hitler. Destroyed the 5th column - traitors-Leninists, traitors-generals (not all), drew the USA to its side as an injured party. By the way, he was never the first to attack Germany, because he understood that then the USSR would be wiped off the face of the earth, for the USSR never had forces at the same time against Germany, the USA and Britain, and that would be what would happen. But to defend against Germany, to attract allies to their side is an excellent political move.

    In general, Hitler was not a con man, he was like a queen on the international chess board, but, as Stalin said, the force of circumstances is more powerful than the power of intentions (I do not remember literally, unfortunately).
    1. Alex
      Alex 21 August 2013 20: 42
      +2
      Quote: Uhe
      Hitler counted on the betrayal of the highest Red Army, and even Zhukov and Khrushchev were involved in the plot there. He also relied on the Leninist guard, ready to raise another rebellion during the German attack (the first rebellion was raised by Trotsky in the 29). That is, the generals were supposed to let Hitler go to Moscow, Hitler had to come to Moscow in the warm season, and there various options had already come into play.

      This is where you found such data ??? !!! There is a special conversation about Zhukov with Khrushchev, these two bloodsuckers are still waiting for their verdict of history, but everything else - "it will be more abruptly than Goethe's Faust."

      Quote: Uhe
      Of course, all negotiations were conducted through Ges.

      You were a stenographer there, or what? As far as I know, after 50 years these materials were re-classified for the same amount.

      Quote: Uhe
      Task Hitler was one of several that would burn out: the creation of the European Union (it turned out, that's why Europe did not particularly resist), the destruction of the USSR (did not work), the destruction of Germany (did not work thanks to Stalin)

      Is everything all right with the thought process?
  8. Kubatai
    Kubatai 20 May 2013 07: 41
    0
    According to the "Barbaros" plan, they should have already met the cold in the defeated country, in the homes of our ancestors.
  9. TURAR
    TURAR 20 May 2013 09: 31
    0
    But what about the "blitzkrieg" in terms of "Barbarossa" war 2 - 3 months ie be in time before the cold weather. But the partisans gave them this (having beaten off the rear from the main units), thanks to Comrade I.G. Starinov.
  • pinecone
    pinecone 18 May 2013 07: 27
    +3
    September 3, 1939 Great Britain and France declared war on Germany. It was joined by the British dominions: Canada, the Union of South Africa, Australia, New Zealand; all British and French colonial possessions, including the huge 500 million India, which was considered the "pearl of the British crown". The Second World War began.
    1. washi
      washi 18 May 2013 15: 48
      0
      They forgot about the Czech Republic.
      It was shared by Germany, Hungary, Poland. The remaining Russians are not divided.
      By the way, I can’t find how they lived in that period. Czechoslovakia is gone. The USSR has not yet entered this territory.
      1. Alex
        Alex 21 August 2013 21: 21
        +2
        Yes, the Czechs lived normally. With a few exceptions, they were happy with everything. They even worked for the Germans. Long and hard.
  • aszzz888
    aszzz888 18 May 2013 07: 38
    +2
    Hitler did not prepare for a long war. The Blitzkrieg plan speaks for itself. "A month, maximum two and my soldiers will celebrate the victory!" At that time, no one from Hitler's entourage could have thought about wintering.
    Out loud, at least.
    1. M. Peter
      M. Peter 18 May 2013 08: 57
      +2
      Quote: aszzz888
      About wintering then none of Hitler’s entourage could have thought.

      Well, probably at that time the "non-geographic" did not broadcast yet and could not warn that the eastern neighbor could have frosts below -10. Themselves simply did not know. The Germans were not going to conquer Siberia, and the west of Russia is still Europe, they thought that there, well, maybe a little "cooler" than theirs, no more. I watched as the footage where the soldiers of the Wehrmacht are trained to survive in the winter conditions of "wild" Russia, jump, clap their hands, rub their nose and ears.
      They just had no idea. Yes, and the winter of 41-42 years broke records of anomalies in temperature drops. In Siberia, such frosts do not always happen now, which then hit near Moscow.
    2. Orty
      Orty 18 May 2013 09: 08
      +1
      Actually, the Barbaross plan provided for the capture of Moscow in three months, although yes, no one thought about wintering.
      1. Shadowcat
        Shadowcat 18 May 2013 10: 02
        +1
        I would say - they thought, but as they say, in "winter apartments" because the war is over. And warm clothes can be requisitioned from the population.
  • tttttt
    tttttt 18 May 2013 07: 53
    +9
    Yes, the world government simply set Hitler against the USSR and then threw firewood into the fire, one by one, then the other, so that the two great countries of the white race would kill as many of each other as possible. When in the 18-19 centuries Russia and Germany (at that time Prussia and Austria-Hungary) were allies, all of Europe stood at attention on a rack.
    1. folds
      folds 18 May 2013 18: 10
      +4
      The second front in Europe was opened only when it became clear that the Red Army alone would reach Berlin.
      - more precisely, when it became clear that the Red Army and the English Channel alone to reach not weak
    2. Alex
      Alex 21 August 2013 21: 28
      +2
      Quote: tttttt (2)
      Yes, the world government just set

      Another supporter of the theory of conspiracy theories. Like, everything in this world is governed by certain arbiters, and world leaders are simply puppets in their hands. At least sometimes turn on the brain, ah! And then so close to paranoia.
  • Ivan Tarasov
    Ivan Tarasov 18 May 2013 08: 00
    +3
    Hitler worked to drain, perhaps not consciously, however, he did not pursue an independent policy, blindly fulfilling the will of his masters.
    Hitler, Mussolini, Emperor of Japan - all of them were puppets tied to one project.
    This project had a completely different meaning than it might seem at first glance. The project is very deep, solving several tasks at once.
    And I must say, the project was completed successfully.
    1. Orty
      Orty 18 May 2013 09: 19
      +9
      It was a disastrous project, and first of all for England, after the war they lost all their colonies in a short time and from an empire over which the sun does not set, turned into an ordinary, albeit non-poor state. The Soviet Union which Hitler was supposed to defeat, but at the same time weaken so much that it was easily finished off by England and France, and that was exactly the plan. You do not think that the Reich would be peaceful and obedient if he had captured the USSR? He would have put anyone with cancer with such resources! So instead of this, the USSR grabbed half of Europe and the power of his army grew so much that the combined Anglo-American forces could not cope with it. So the plan failed.
      I do not like the Anglo-Saxons, they are still scum, but do not exaggerate their capabilities, Hitler did not pursue an independent policy? Those. when he bombed England and prepared for the operation of a sea lion, what was it? It did not work out, but it could have gone differently. So, even though Hitler was originally THEIR project, he was tired of dancing to the tune of someone else quickly, as did the Bolsheviks in Russia too. If they (the owners) are so smart, did they screw up so much twice between 1917 and 1939?
      1. Ivan Tarasov
        Ivan Tarasov 18 May 2013 09: 40
        -1
        Those. when he bombed England and prepared for the operation of a sea lion, what was it?

        Same as the September 11 attacks in the United States.
        It was a fake, Hitler did not intend to capture England, he did only what he was allowed to do.
        1. Alex
          Alex 21 August 2013 21: 40
          +2
          Another client in the same place.
      2. skeptic-
        skeptic- 18 May 2013 15: 31
        +1
        Quote: Orty
        It was a disastrous project, and first of all for England, after the war they lost all their colonies in a short time and from an empire over which the sun does not set, turned into an ordinary, albeit non-poor state.


        Well, not quite a failure. When the slave owners realized that a free person can be milked with great effect - there were columns (they were allowed to have a family and a small piece of land)
        When the colonialists realized that it was not necessary to have colonies, in the literal sense, it was enough controlled by the government and resources of the country, they refused direct colonization.
        Therefore, the shadow backstage acts in the intended framework for itself. And all the countries of the world, for them - pawns, in their games, on the world map.

        How can we not be unpleasant to realize, but what have they screwed up?
        If we discard the existence of the USSR under the leadership of Stalin.
      3. washi
        washi 18 May 2013 15: 51
        0
        And who in England is a guide? We remove the official.
      4. Alex
        Alex 21 August 2013 21: 39
        +2
        All problems and ambiguities in this regard can be solved simply, if we assume the simplest (this is what comrade Okam suggested) - there is no "world government", and the momentary plans of transnational monopolies are grandiose though. but almost never reach the final goal. The human factor, however ...
    2. Alex
      Alex 21 August 2013 21: 31
      +2
      If you believe in this nonsense unconditionally and completely - a psychiatrist will help you. Although not everyone will take it.
  • My address
    My address 18 May 2013 08: 05
    +4
    Normal, logical article. The Saxons simply "threw" Hitler. They are like that with everyone.
    1. djon3volta
      djon3volta 18 May 2013 09: 28
      10 th
      Quote: My address
      Saxons simply "threw" Hitler.

      and if the United States did not help the USSR with technology, but joined Hitler themselves? I think you and I would not be 100% with you now, and Americans and Germans would walk across Russia, that would be so.
      It remains a mystery why the Americans did not join Hitler? Didn’t think of it? Or is there still someone in heaven who we call a god who did not let the Americans think of it? what
      1. Babon
        Babon 18 May 2013 14: 40
        +2
        Eugene, well, you are a smart person. Let's start with the Versailles Peace Treaty. After this peace, Germany was an ordinary weak European country, Germany certainly could not become any power. But someone allowed them to violate all the terms of this agreement. And about the USSR, the United States, we were selling entire factories "turnkey" so to speak. Remember, then England was the ruler of the seas, not the United States. A serious massacre was being prepared. During the war, the United States was more busy weakening England, which in general happened. And the massacre in Europe was of little interest to them. the longer. so much the better for them. Well, for the laurels of the winner, they, of course, also landed in the summer of 44. Although operation Bagration was carried out at that time, and our army did not need their landing, so everything was clear.
      2. stranik72
        stranik72 18 May 2013 21: 07
        +1
        Well, you completely deviated from the EDR line, although there at one time they also talked (and some even now) that it is better to be a colony of the USA than a free Russia. It was not God who helped the Americans, but completely different considerations, and they have nothing to do with either morality or decency. The world "wallet" England with its Jewish lobby, that's who was the one who, both in the 1st world and in the 2nd, attracted the USA to their side.
        1. tomket
          tomket 19 May 2013 12: 22
          0
          Who broke in the end so it is England, by the way she often threw the Jews, maybe she was torn to pieces as a result, Israel, by the way, also arose not by the will of England, but can be said contrary to
    2. Gari
      Gari 18 May 2013 10: 49
      +4
      Quote: My address
      Normal, logical article. The Saxons simply "threw" Hitler. They are like that with everyone.

      Last phrase
      The second front in Europe was opened only when it became clear that the Red Army alone would reach Berlin.
      And would have reached
    3. Alex
      Alex 21 August 2013 22: 02
      +2
      Where you see the logic here, I personally do not understand. Although, if the answer is known in advance
      Hitler's Saxons just "threw"
      then ... yes ... of course.
  • Delink
    Delink 18 May 2013 08: 27
    0
    He did not want to attack, but he did what he did. And there is no excuse for this.
    Contemporaries still dance to the Anglo-Saxon tune.
  • Dima190579
    Dima190579 18 May 2013 08: 38
    0
    The story of the corrupt girl of imperialism.
    1. omsbon
      omsbon 18 May 2013 09: 57
      +4
      Quote: Dima190579
      The story of the corrupt girl of imperialism.

      People interpret and write history! At what angle they look, they make such a sense!
    2. Dima190579
      Dima190579 20 May 2013 04: 25
      0
      Well, I’m writing about the same thing.
  • borisjdin1957
    borisjdin1957 18 May 2013 08: 53
    0
    from the Don.
    RUSSIA-an unshakable cliff from ancient times!
    GOD IS WITH US!!!
  • Atlon
    Atlon 18 May 2013 09: 48
    0
    Why doesn’t it allow me to post a comment ?!
    Writes: "Inadmissible text for publication" !!! I've been fighting for half an hour! There is NOTHING forbidden in the text !!!!
  • Atlon
    Atlon 18 May 2013 09: 49
    0
    The message contains inappropriate text for publication.
  • Atlon
    Atlon 18 May 2013 09: 50
    +1
    evil is not enough! Admins, do something! What nonsense ???
  • Vladomir
    Vladomir 18 May 2013 10: 01
    0
    Hitler was nourished by England, France and the United States, and he was given the Czechoslovakia-Poland corridor to reach the borders of the USSR.
  • Ataman
    Ataman 18 May 2013 10: 05
    +4
    And how the author will explain such a historical fact. German troops launched an attack on France on May 10, 1940, declaring war on Germany on September 3, 1939, in connection with its attack on Poland.
    1. M. Peter
      M. Peter 18 May 2013 11: 33
      0
      And before that there was a period called the "strange war" when the enemy soldiers looked at each other like fans of football teams, through binoculars examining the combinations of football battles that the French and British arranged between themselves on the alleged "front line" of this very strange war.
  • newcomer
    newcomer 18 May 2013 10: 05
    28 th
    Quote: borisjdin1957
    RUSSIA-an unshakable cliff from ancient times!
    GOD IS WITH US!!!

    England turned out to be a "cliff" in the war. they alone fought against Germany for over a year and survived! and the fascists were not allowed on their land! but our "invincible and legendary", in the 41st (having multiple quantitative and qualitative superiority), abandoning equipment and equipment, ran towards the Far East ... until the nkvdeshniki stopped near Moscow.
    1. djon3volta
      djon3volta 18 May 2013 11: 06
      +4
      Quote: newbie
      having thrown equipment and equipment, it ran towards the Far East ... until the NKVD officers stopped at Moscow.

      he himself came up with something, or who suggested?
      1. washi
        washi 18 May 2013 16: 02
        12 th
        NKVD divisions stopped. And we drove divisions from Kazakhstan, Siberia and the Far East
    2. Babon
      Babon 18 May 2013 11: 12
      +5
      Decided to spend some time? England actually is on the island, and at that time they had a strong fleet. And on the account of superiority, in airplanes we were clearly inferior, and in modern warfare, logistics is very important. We still need to service the equipment, which we also conceded. You must have forgotten France fell in 2 weeks, there still the British drove to Dunkirk, and Poland for 3. But we are not, here is Blitzkrieg.
      1. Alex
        Alex 21 August 2013 23: 14
        +2
        Actually, France 40 days resisted, as I recall.
    3. Babon
      Babon 18 May 2013 11: 21
      +3
      Well, England is such a "cliff" for 6 years of war, 300 irrecoverable losses. After that, it immediately becomes clear how much they fought with Germany. At Stalingrad, that Germany, that ours lost much more in half a year.
    4. carbofo
      carbofo 18 May 2013 12: 52
      0
      Your grass is picky!
      I’m wondering, do you even understand what you’re saying?
      Or degradation is already irreversible.
    5. yurta2013
      yurta2013 18 May 2013 13: 14
      +7
      In fact, England resisted only because Hitler did not finish it off in 1940, but switched to preparing an invasion of the USSR. And there is no need to scold at the defeat of our army in 1941 either. Still, we are talking about the honor of our ancestors. Near Moscow, not only the enkavedeshniki fought.
      1. smile
        smile 18 May 2013 17: 02
        -1
        yurta2013
        Sorry, I accidentally put a mine on you ... from now on I will be more careful ...
        1. yurta2013
          yurta2013 19 May 2013 16: 55
          0
          Probably out of habit. Actually, I'm already used to it. I understand who does this and why. My dream is to rise to the chief ship sergeant so far, and maybe there to the admiral, who knows?
    6. builder
      builder 18 May 2013 22: 12
      0
      England had a good anti-tank moat - English Channel
      1. carbofo
        carbofo 20 May 2013 11: 55
        0
        Quote: stroitel
        England had a good anti-tank moat - English Channel

        Just not for our tanks :), we just need this piece of island g ... not even needed for a toilet.
    7. Alex
      Alex 21 August 2013 23: 01
      +2
      But this is not treated by electric shock.
  • vkusniikorj
    vkusniikorj 18 May 2013 10: 15
    +5
    like children, by golly!
    look who got the biggest profit as a result of the war.
    who still receives tribute from the Germans and the Americans and the British? who incites Arabs against each other, who teases superpowers? This is not even a country, this is one people! He lives everywhere and works as if for everyone, but in truth he works only for himself. Jews created the atomic bomb in America; they created it in the USSR.
    take this site. recently I offered my vision of the solution of the Arab-Jewish question. something like "St. Bartholomew's night" in Arabic. I was warned by the moderators "nizzza!" Yesterday I spoke in a key like "urine in the outhouse of non-Russians" - I got a stripe on the shoulder strap! there is one that encourages the disintegration of Russia and fights between peoples. and you, who sent Adolf on the right path?
    1. djon3volta
      djon3volta 18 May 2013 11: 10
      -1
      Quote: vkusniikorj
      and you who directed the adolf to the true path?

      there is a true documentary ETERNAL ... filmed in 1939 by the Germans. there is the whole true essence about them.
      1. Babon
        Babon 18 May 2013 11: 14
        0
        Eugene, what films are you watching, I also watched this film, is it about the Polish ghetto, about some residents, did I understand correctly?
        1. djon3volta
          djon3volta 18 May 2013 12: 49
          -1
          Quote: Babon
          I understood correctly?

          yes. but it’s not only about the Polish ghetto, if you watched the whole film. The story tells how, where and when it started. The film goes completely 65 minutes. There is YouTube.
          I emphasize - there is not only about the Polish ghetto.
    2. rereture
      rereture 18 May 2013 16: 33
      0
      Again the Jews are to blame, right? He invented the nuclear bomb in the USSR, did not stole it, did not peep, namely, the Russian physicist Kurchatov and his team of scientists invented.
    3. Selevc
      Selevc 20 May 2013 17: 37
      -1
      And by the way, the same Jews came up with the patriotic songs that you sang as a child, and many still love to sing and came up with films that are admired by more than one generation of citizens in the post-Soviet space !!! :))))))))))))
  • Shuriken
    Shuriken 18 May 2013 10: 23
    +5
    Oh, Svanidze, along the way, registered!
  • Shuriken
    Shuriken 18 May 2013 10: 54
    +1
    And then he was upset that he was burned, minus put. On "rambler", disrespectful, on "echo" - there are all yours!
  • Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 18 May 2013 11: 38
    +1
    The West (Britain, France, USA) pushed Hitler to the East with all its might! Exerted economic and political action on Germany to accomplish this task. This fact, I think, is undeniable. And then the Anglo-Saxons fulfilled their task: Germany attacked the USSR. But what about this issue today? Yes, just like then, in the 30s of the last century. Only the forms and methods of the dismemberment of Russia have become more sophisticated, more savage. Everyone is haunted by the huge reserves of natural resources in Russia. In this century, new threats to Russia are emerging that are not associated with our old "friends" - the West. This is a rapidly growing China.
    1. Babon
      Babon 18 May 2013 11: 57
      0
      But what about the idea of ​​a "great Caliphate"? It also has a clearly anti-Russian tinge. A purely western project. Just manipulating people's minds. they do not even realize that they are fighting to please the West. But still Hitler understood what the Western countries were like and gave it well to the French.
  • Makarov
    Makarov 18 May 2013 11: 49
    -1
    interesting point of view ...
  • Captain45
    Captain45 18 May 2013 11: 56
    +6
    Well, if we consider Hitler's attack on the USSR in the aspect of the research books of Prudnikova, Kolpakidi, Martirosyan and others, then it becomes clear that Hitler really relied on the blitz-krieg-lightning-fast war, but one of the main conditions for victory in the blitz-krieg was not only lightning-fast tank envelopes, massive air raids and other strategic tricks. This is all true, but it was necessary at the initial stage in order to inflict heavy defeats, so to speak, in technical, material terms, and then the secret weapon of the blitz-krieg entered the "fifth column" the lured, sympathetic elite from among the leadership, skillfully hanging noodles to the people about the impossibility of waging further resistance, concluded surrender with the Germans and now it is a victory. Just like Hitler hoped that in the USSR, after a series of heavy defeats at the fronts, a change of leadership would take place and the new government would make peace with Germany with all the ensuing consequences in the form of territories, resources and other things. But he miscalculated. It was not in vain that he told us The American ambassador, that the USSR is holding on because it shot its traitors before the war. I feel that the minus liberals will come running in now, but I am not upset that you will take it from the "offended". For them, I advise you to read the book by G. Rauschning "Hitler Speaks. The Beast from the Abyss", where he (Hitler) in his table conversations reveals his secret plans for achieving victory in the war.
    1. carbofo
      carbofo 18 May 2013 13: 17
      +4
      That's right, such is the European way of thinking: got to the underpants, you need to calm down and give in the ass.
      Here they ran into those who for whatever grab still hit in the face and hit.
      The Germans wrote in diaries
      5 Soviet soldiers fired at a regiment of 800 soldiers, 100% suicide.
      The machine gunner continued to shoot even when he was already engulfed in flames.
      From the whole division we could not take a single prisoner, Russian soldiers rushed at the Germans with grenades in their hands.
      A cannon at the farm and 1 (one) Russian soldier stopped and shot a convoy of equipment by firing 2 shells in 56 hours of battle.
      A Russian officer shot a soldier from a hatch of a wrecked tank with a pistol, and his legs were torn off by a shell.
      A platoon of soldiers and 2 German officers captured 1 (one) soldier with a supply of ammunition, a total of 2 officers hacked with an ax, a dozen corpses of Germans and the rest surrendered.
      This list is endless.
      But Stalin did a good job on time, although it wasn’t very well aimed as it turned out, the Gestapo had the same problem, people began to settle personal scores using the Gestapo.
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 19 May 2013 14: 16
        -1
        A platoon of soldiers and 2 German officers captured 1 (one) soldier with a supply of ammunition, a total of 2 officers hacked with an ax, a dozen corpses of Germans and the rest surrendered.


        The case is well-known, but rather strange, it is possible that the Russian was not alone, one can be shot dead even with weapons in the stowed position.
        1. yurta2013
          yurta2013 19 May 2013 16: 53
          -1
          Quote: Avenger711
          The case is known, but rather strange

          I would even say that this case is too much like an army joke.
          1. carbofo
            carbofo 20 May 2013 02: 03
            0
            [b Avenger711 - yurta201 [/ b]
            http://topwar.ru/14249-terminator-iz-krasnoy-armii.html

            Learn the story!
            1. yurta2013
              yurta2013 20 May 2013 17: 28
              0
              carbofo
              Quote: carbofo
              [b Avenger711 - yurta201 [/ b] http://topwar.ru/14249-terminator-iz-krasnoy-armii.html Learn History!

              Thank you for reading. I would not be surprised if this "Red Army soldier Ovcharenko" never received his hero star. Still, no awards were given. The most interesting thing is that the command took the "hero" at his word. After all, there were no other witnesses besides him. He could simply pick up the documents of the killed fascists in some bombed or shell-wrecked staff car. The commentary to this piece of paper by the author of that article also looks cool. It seems that he knows about the war only from American action films and computer games.
              1. yurta2013
                yurta2013 20 May 2013 18: 15
                0
                Quote: yurta2013
                Still, no awards were given.

                Here I have crossed out one word after the particle "not", translated from Russian means very stupid people. It can be formulated in another way: The awards were still not so stupid people gave out.
  • yurta2013
    yurta2013 18 May 2013 12: 50
    -8
    The next creation of the typical neo-Stalinist Starkov is, of course, not devoted to the question of whether Hitler started the war sooner or later. Its main goal, like all his other writings, is to assure the reader that Stalin had nothing to do with the outbreak of World War II. It was the damned West that created Hitler and incited him against the USSR in order to end Russia once and for all. This, allegedly, is the only reason and essence of the 2nd MV. To prove this absurd conclusion, he turns to the peculiarities of the construction of the German fleet before the war. If Hitler built so few submarines, then, according to Starkov, he was not going to fight for world domination with Britain and the United States, but from the very beginning he was preparing for war only with the USSR. There is no sensation in the fact that Hitler was originally going to fight the USSR. The struggle "for the eastern territories" is spelled out in his program book "Mein Kampf". However, this does not at all exclude the goal of the struggle for world domination. On the contrary. The defeat of the USSR and the seizure of the most valuable part of its territory was for Hitler only the most important step in achieving world domination. From the territory of the USSR, it was possible to invade the Asian colonies of England, without which the British Empire would immediately become a supernumerary European state, unable to claim a leading position in the world (that is, what England is at the moment). And the British leadership then (in the person of Churchill) understood this threat perfectly. That is why it was not interested in the defeat of the USSR and provided him with all possible assistance for her. The lend-lease aid itself, the lion's share of which was supplied from the United States, refutes Starkov's inventions. This alone excludes the USA's interest in Germany's victory over the USSR. In addition, the United States (as well as England) directly participated in the war with Germany and its ally Japan since 2. And not virtually, but quite realistically, by the forces of their army and navy in the Pacific Ocean and in North Africa.
    1. Babon
      Babon 18 May 2013 13: 12
      +2
      And if you recall the Versailles Peace Treaty? Why did they constantly violate it? What ... Germany was forgiven all? For what? Where did they kill millions of people and what part of the world lay in ruins after the war?
      1. yurta2013
        yurta2013 18 May 2013 16: 06
        -3
        It is not clear: Who constantly violated the Treaty of Versailles? Germany or former Entente countries? Who has killed millions of people? Please express yourself more precisely. As for the ruins, then in them lay all the territories through which the war passed. There were ruins in England (from the bombing), although much less than in Germany, France, China, Japan, countries of eastern and southeastern Europe and the USSR.
        1. smile
          smile 18 May 2013 17: 12
          +3
          yurta2013
          Britain and France deliberately secured the integrity of Austria in the treaty, but according to the Treaty of Versailles they were guarantors of its observance - they were obliged to ensure by all means and means the fulfillment of all its provisions ... because they violated it ....
          A small example - after Versailles, Austria concluded several more treaties stating that she had no right to join with Germany, in 31 they gave her a loan on the condition that she refuses forever and ever from joining with Germany ... and here, Hitler came to power ... to remind you of what they said to the Austrian President at the embassies of England and France, where he rushed for protection after Hitler's ultimatum? ... Or do you think too. that 13 French divisions on the Austrian border were frightened by three German battalions (which had an order to flee at the first shot)? They had to very diligently "fear" the powerless Hitler until then. until they raised him, nursed him, armed him and tried to set him on us ...
          1. yurta2013
            yurta2013 19 May 2013 09: 56
            -1
            The fact that England and France until 1939 tried to direct Hitler's aggression to the east, I do not deny. Everyone has known this in our country for a long time. I am outraged by attempts to hide the guilt of Stalin as well in unleashing World War II. It was his signing of an agreement with Hitler in August 2 that allowed the Germans to attack Poland. Without this treaty, Hitler would not have dared to do this, since he was not yet ready for a possible war in the USSR. Stalin’s role is also known in inciting the Communist Party of Germany to the German Social Democrats through the Comintern, which, in many respects, led to a fall in the popularity of both of these warring parties and to an increase in the popularity of the National Socialists, which ultimately came to be quite legal authorities in Germany. Lastly, I remind you that the French divisions could not be on the border of Austria, since France does not border it.
            1. washi
              washi 1 June 2013 18: 10
              0
              And where are the memories of the same agreements with France, Britain, Poland, the USA?
              Stalin drove the Comintern, put its leaders
    2. carbofo
      carbofo 18 May 2013 16: 19
      0
      yurta2013
      Do you sing falsetto ?, European or what?
      1. yurta2013
        yurta2013 19 May 2013 09: 39
        -1
        I am Russian, but I prefer a bitter, but true story to pleasant, but false Stalinist myths.
        1. carbofo
          carbofo 20 May 2013 08: 57
          -1
          The true story is that nothing prevented us from capturing the whole of Europe, by that time our troops were at the peak of their combat uniforms and experience.
          But why did we stop? We didn’t kill the German children, but Stalin wanted to take the whole world, everywhere they had already shattered bricks from fear, but we didn’t go? probably scared of the church?
          Everything is much simpler and more complicated than you think, we did not need it!
          We have questions about your nationality !, but not about that.
          As for the truth, well, then I think you should read a lot of things where you can see who says what and what does it, and then compare, I think the USSR will give odds to anyone in terms of truth in Truth.
          1. yurta2013
            yurta2013 20 May 2013 17: 04
            0
            I think, "you need to read a lot of things where you can see who says what and what does". In general, you need to read more, but not the Stalinist tales about the war. They are harmful to mental health.
          2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Avenger711
      Avenger711 19 May 2013 14: 16
      -1
      I would just put you in prison for such a rotten market for life.
      1. yurta2013
        yurta2013 19 May 2013 16: 47
        0
        Strong in you is the Stalinist sourdough. Your ancestors didn’t serve as an event in the camps? Or maybe in the NKVD?
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 19 May 2013 19: 59
          -1
          No, I only had a grandfather sitting, long life to him. He was a thief at that time, but thieves were planted, also probably some lists of the repressed are listed.
          1. yurta2013
            yurta2013 20 May 2013 16: 56
            0
            Only those convicted under article 53 are officially considered repressed.
            1. yurta2013
              yurta2013 21 May 2013 11: 07
              +1
              Quote: yurta2013
              Only those convicted under article 53 are officially considered repressed.

              I apologize not for the 53rd, but for the 58th. Apparently Stalin beguiled me, with his 1953 year.
            2. Larus
              Larus 21 May 2013 14: 51
              0
              But in the propaganda of the fighters with the regime, inflated figures always appear, and even all the articles.
              1. yurta2013
                yurta2013 21 May 2013 17: 39
                0
                Quote: Larus
                in the propaganda of fighters with the regime always appear inflated figures, and even all the articles

                Here I completely agree with you. Indeed, in almost every article, of those that I read in this section of the site, it’s full of bloated numbers. Apparently, their authors are fighting a serious struggle with the current regime.
  • Gahprom
    Gahprom 18 May 2013 14: 30
    -4
    I read, and I think that the author is overwhelmed by mushrooms?
    look and faithfully Starikov
    1. Babon
      Babon 18 May 2013 14: 46
      +1
      And what did he write wrong? Really, Germany, by no means could fight with England. And why was Germany allowed to create an army?
      1. Gahprom
        Gahprom 18 May 2013 15: 55
        0
        Quote: Babon
        And what did he write wrong? Really, Germany, by no means could fight with England. And why was Germany allowed to create an army?

        we don’t read the Starikovs, we think for ourselves!

        and what is England?
        Where is she after the war? Where is Great Britain? Why would she go under attack? Why fatten Germany?
        Where is the Great France after the war?
        Where is the great Germany?
        to whose tune are they dancing? who "gives water to the girls"? Who were these competitors hindered by?
        and most importantly, who remained in the black? What empire rules now, having received profit in the war? Where did money bags get dumped from Europe?
        That's who is at the forefront!
        That's all, everything is drawn to proving his wrong idea - the Old Men, in a word, from him even the Stalinist is worthless

        ps, while the author categorically pulls the ow-
        where is even a word about Tauhpanzer? Schwimmpanzer ii
        where is the word about Pionierlandungsboot 39? about other barges?
        at the same time, it is known how the Britons were afraid of one German ship ..... and how the Germans drove convoys "having complete unavailability at sea."
        With such success, it can be said that having 2000 tanks, and without building new ones in thousands and equal in strength to KV1, Hitler did not plan to attack the USSR ...

        judging by the minuses, fans of the old man are indignant
        1. carbofo
          carbofo 18 May 2013 16: 23
          +2
          Quote: Gahpro
          judging by the minuses, fans of the old man are indignant

          It’s not about Starikov, the thing is that we are from the USSR, and you, hmm, I don’t know, a citizen should love the Motherland !!!, not the government and bureaucracy, namely the Motherland.
          You were raised in hatred of your own country, live on like an insect without a clan and tribe, without conscience and principles, without honor and duty.
          1. Gahprom
            Gahprom 18 May 2013 16: 36
            +3
            Quote: carbofo
            It’s not about Starikov, the thing is that we are from the USSR, and you, hmm, I don’t know, a citizen should love the Motherland !!!, not the government and bureaucracy, namely the Motherland.
            You were raised in hatred of your own country, live on like an insect without a clan and tribe, without conscience and principles, without honor and duty.

            where does the USSR? Or can you prove that the ropes were not pulled in the USA?
            And never tell anyone that, because in the USSR there was an excellent education, even in remote areas you could get a mountain of knowledge, and in those years it was known about Tirpitz and the PQ-17 Convoy. About the sea lion, there are floating tanks even in the "liberation "Ozerova. Hitler had to attack England and France, he must!
            Only Hitler could do this, as well as the fact that he attacked the USSR.
            To consider the opposite is to play to please Hitler, whitewash him.
            All Europe was preparing for war

            probably you drank all the lessons 777, and now you tear the vest, or an Israeli spy.

            Even Stalin considered the war of England and Germany inevitable
            1. carbofo
              carbofo 18 May 2013 20: 35
              0
              When you write, look what they quoted?
        2. smile
          smile 18 May 2013 17: 19
          +1
          Gahprom
          Regarding the decline of the British Empire - all claims against the United States, related in kind and took control of the British under economic and military control (out of habit, having robbed - having taken away colonies and slaves, they simply began to exploit the colonies by other methods) ... France went there too .. .
          That. that Starikov is not strong in technology, and he has controversial conclusions, does not mean that his other conclusions are incorrect ... you read the whole book and then clown around .... to draw conclusions based on the passage is less than half a percent of the whole book. ..you, respected in this regard, look much more unfounded than the Starikov criticized by you ...
          1. Gahprom
            Gahprom 18 May 2013 17: 49
            -1
            Regarding the decline of the British Empire - all claims against the United States, related in kind and took control of the British under economic and military control (out of habit, having robbed - having taken away colonies and slaves, they simply began to exploit the colonies by other methods) ... France went there too .. .

            I’m leading to this, while Europe, in its communal apartment, shared the not killed deer, someone was preparing for a completely different war, and in the end won the most

            That. that Starikov is not strong in technology, and he has controversial conclusions, does not mean that his other conclusions are incorrect ... you read the whole book and then clown around .... to draw conclusions based on the passage is less than half a percent of the whole book. ..you, respected in this regard, look much more unfounded than the Starikov criticized by you ...

            I already read below that you admire
            to me, in order to understand that there is something similar to ge, it’s not necessary to eat the whole bunch, it’s enough appearance.
            I don’t like constant stretches, against the background of poor knowledge of the materiel, I don’t like that this is done, only to prove
            your thought
            Once again, the facts are adjusted to your idea, uncomfortable fall
            you like, your right.
            ps. At the same time, the fact that Giitler did not prepare for war is pure Rezunism, not all "residents of the USSR (see above)" understand this.
            1. smile
              smile 18 May 2013 18: 21
              0
              Gahprom
              I would like to correct you ... I DON'T ENTRY INTO A BOOK ... I just don’t know how to do this, I am quite critical of any information, it’s just a habit-work like that ... this also applies to Starikov, which is why I mentioned that I do not agree with all its conclusions ...
              Regarding rezunizma .... in my opinion. you just didn’t understand - this book is just the indirect answer to Rezun ... therefore Starikov intentionally uses some of his phrases, verbal phrases and, in places, similar vocabulary ..
            2. vladim.gorbunow
              vladim.gorbunow 18 May 2013 22: 26
              +1
              In a record of Hitler’s speech at the rate of January 41 (it seems the 10th), they clearly said that a war with the USSR would be waged to end the conflict with Great Britain, there were no concrete plans for the development of Soviet territory in view of the complexity of the process. Germany fulfilled its strategic objectives, having gained dominance in Europe.
          2. vladim.gorbunow
            vladim.gorbunow 18 May 2013 22: 06
            0
            Having said A, it should be said B. If it was so profitable to take control of the Britons, then inexorable logic requires recognizing that the benefits are calculated and prepared in advance. Consequently, Hitler was hired to attack precisely Britain. There were no Anglo-Americans. There was an old huge empire and a young predator, 2 countries for 15 years, which were on the verge of a hot war. And who fought a fierce war of trade and financial. Where there was everything: refusals from external debt, sequestration of capital, violation of contracts and the arms race. The American for the purchase of British government bonds was threatened for up to 5 years by Johnson's law of 1934. So it puts a shadow on your old man. But why?
            1. smile
              smile 18 May 2013 22: 45
              0
              vladim.gorbunow
              In principle, I agree ... and we were preparing to take the place of Britain since the 19th century, taking the first serious steps before and during the First World War ... nevertheless, do not dramatize their confrontation unnecessarily - despite internecine squabbles, in important foreign policy issues they in most cases, they were surprisingly unanimous ... the likelihood of a hot war between the Britons and the United States is vanishingly small - this is not their style, especially since both sides understood that in the event of the inevitable mutual destruction of the fleets, both sides would go to the dustbin of history for a long time, especially it concerned Britain, whose colonies would be torn apart by other European countries ... so that Starikov does not distort anything in this matter, in my opinion ...
              1. vladim.gorbunow
                vladim.gorbunow 19 May 2013 00: 09
                +1
                Right . it’s difficult to fight with the progenitor country. So they found an elegant solution - to provide fraternal assistance in exchange for the Bretton Woods currency system. Small squabbles amount to about $ 20-22 billion, this is Britain’s refusal of the gold standard, the collapse of American investment and their sequestration under the law on imperial preferences of 32, and of course the international default arranged by the British by Amer. to loans. For comparison, multiply recommend 40 times. The Roosevelt administration had to devalue the dollar, withdraw gold from circulation, fight social protests, and even hunger. The answer of the Americans was a military program, scheduled in 36 -37g. The construction of the Idaho – Missouri line super linkors more than 20, Lensington aircraft carriers and then dozens, strategic bombers - thousands. The war thwarted these plans in a number of positions. But according to Starikov spit and forget how America and Britain could not divide Latin America and China, it was more important for them to bring
                1. smile
                  smile 19 May 2013 05: 45
                  -1
                  vladim.gorbunow
                  You are clever! ... The key - your expression - has found an elegant solution ... :))) You see .. "petty squabbles" against the background of millions of corpses really look like petty squabbles ... although the case, as you rightly mentioned, is billions ... those billions ... and the construction of battleships ... let's remember the Japanese "Congo" .... their subsequent series, horrifying that the Americans, that the British .... let's remember. why the Yapas began to build aircraft carriers ... and on the basis of what ships ... and so ... the presentation of events is correct and does not contradict what Starikov says ... :)))) I suppose. even he himself understood that his position is not perfect in some places ... therefore, no one makes an idol of him ... knowing some of his shortcomings, I really advertise his book ... perhaps it is worth demanding advertising from him ... so he won't give Well bastard ... bastard-a priori-because I did not pay for advertising in advance .... well, isn't it? :))))
                  1. vladim.gorbunow
                    vladim.gorbunow 19 May 2013 12: 28
                    +1
                    Your desire to introduce additional texture into the discussion is understandable. But with Japan, the subjective blinders are falling. She transformed from a loyal ally of Britain into an aggressor country that attacked the USA, but in reality the Japanese swept the British out of the Pacific and almost from the Indian. blow to English. dominions. And then there were up to 30 million bodies in the face of the Chinese. But here we are indifferent. At the heart of these miracles lies a system of collusion, blackmail, and lures that exploited Japanese financial, technological, and raw material dependence on the outside world, as did Germany, China, and the USSR. Stalin's assessment is known, where Churchill cannot be trusted with a wallet, then Roosevelt is a criminal of immeasurable proportions. He said many times - "The USSR is being dragged into the war," he knew what he was saying. If there is a traditional enmity with England, then with America in the early 30s there was a secret alliance, traces of which are full. Hence the insight of Stalin in 31, "in 10 years we will be crushed." As well as the signature letters to him am. businessmen who demanded to curtail the English Lend-Lease in favor of the Soviet.
                    1. smile
                      smile 19 May 2013 13: 35
                      0
                      vladim.gorbunow
                      It’s nice to talk with you :)))) ... but in vain you are taking the discussion aside ... the fact is that I wrote the last comment in 5-45 in our .... yes, after I dispersed the guests to sleep around the house ... well ... here, I think everything is clear? :)))
                      So, returning to the topic - the Washington Agreement for 22 years, Britain and the United States tried not to violate ... and practically did not violate ... this is very expensive - for everyone ...
                      There is no reason to believe that the Anglo-Saxons were on the brink of war, I personally do not see ... they are simply not there, and it is unreasonable to suspect them of stupidity ...
                      You pointed out our cooperation with the USA ... yes, that's right .. so what? Does this suggest that they were on the brink of war with the Britons? You correctly described the role of Japan ... but does it follow from all of the above that Starikov is wrong in the fact that Hitler was brought up and brought up by the USA and Britain with the aim of inciting us? ... I don’t know if this is the case, that I didn’t sleep that night, or I just lacked my mental abilities, but I really, without jokes, do not see in your comments the arguments that incontrovertibly convict Starikov of insinuations ... :)))) excuse me ...
                      1. vladim.gorbunow
                        vladim.gorbunow 19 May 2013 17: 05
                        0
                        I’ll try to clarify the definitions. Starikov claims: the USA and Great Britain, spitting on their contradictions, have been preparing shoulder to shoulder for 10 years in a very large northern country, where instead of roads, directions, electrification at the bud, mineral resources are extremely small (achievements of Soviet geology are ahead), technologies are secondary and artisanal. Moreover, Hitler, Churchill, Roosevelt are sure - the USSR will fall instantly, a lot of evidence. What to do then? Force Hitler to build autobahns? Why plan something for 10 years without understanding how to derive strategic benefits? Moreover, specific examples of cooperation with Hitler go only along the US-German line. My position is that the USA faced with the ruler of half the world, the owner of 60% of the planet’s intelligence resources, the world banker is defeated, falls into depression, but does not give up. They establish informal ties with 4 projects: Germany, Japan, China, the USSR. All are extremely dependent on outside help: financial, technological, and raw materials. The guarantee of fulfillment of obligations is this dependence. What is surprised that the amers delivered petroleum products to Germany up to 44 g, and to the curses of Hitler Roosevelt. The goal is the liquidation of the British Empire. And it all worked out. Churchill pulled himself into Fulton with repentance, the ruins of his empire became the foundation for a neo-imperial project. 4 projects of the 30s lay in the ruins of the literal. And until now, this whole story is obscured, and therefore relevant.
              2. vladim.gorbunow
                vladim.gorbunow 19 May 2013 00: 23
                +1
                The Wehrmacht in Kalmyk black steppes is the culmination of the eastern campaign. But let me remind you that in January 43, the Americans made the British start oil production in Iran and Saudi Arabia to compensate for efforts to combat the British energy crisis of 41-42. Then, they unilaterally introduced the dollar as the settlement currency in the Middle East. not according to Starikov.
        3. washi
          washi 1 June 2013 18: 15
          0
          And who get the most benefits is that in 1 that in 2 world. Whose enterprises worked for the Wehrmacht and Lend-Lease? Whose enterprises didn’t bomb?
  • smile
    smile 18 May 2013 16: 20
    +1
    Guys, I’m reading this book by Starikov now, now on page 319:)))) - and I want to say that this is not the most interesting passage ...
    In general, the book is amazing ... maybe I’m an illiterate mug, but I rarely come across books that contain so many facts about which I had not even heard before even with my ear .... this is one of them ... for example, I don’t knew that the leading role in the formation of Hitler was played by a certain comrade Hanfstaengl - a half-American-half-German ... who, having arrived from the USA and dug up Hitler in a beer house, then taught him to talk with him, to dress, give money, introduced him to the right people ... Together with Churchill’s son, he drove G. on a plane to the campaign for more than six months at the beginning of the thirties, organized his meeting with Churchill (didn’t meet, Adik refused ... and Churchill mentioned this, some young man approached, asked, forgetting to say that Hanfstaengl is the friend of his son) ... in the year 37 this G. moved to the USA, allegedly fleeing the Nazis :)))) and got a job ... Roosevelt's adviser on Germany ... how do you like your career? And who raised Hitler?
    In general, I recommend the book in person ... there are some controversial conclusions of the author, but there are few of them, they are insignificant and the author approaches the actual material very responsibly.
    1. carbofo
      carbofo 18 May 2013 16: 29
      -4
      Such things happen all the time, someone flies their brains to someone with their ideas, but people make their way to power with their ideas when they grow up a little, the same Lenin, as well as later, began to help Hitler at some stage from the outside in rather big volumes.
      So they don’t do ANYTHING, a person should initially carry the idea and have supporters so that interested parties can help him.
      1. carbofo
        carbofo 18 May 2013 20: 31
        +1
        Wow, how many legitimate Frenchmen climbed out under the new law!
        1. smile
          smile 18 May 2013 22: 50
          0
          carbofo (
          Sorry ... I accidentally got into your French ... but I honestly, honestly accidentally ... the second time today .... + ... :))))
          1. carbofo
            carbofo 20 May 2013 11: 52
            0
            Quote: smile
            Sorry ... I accidentally got into your French ... but I honestly, honestly accidentally ... the second time today .... + ... :))))

            This is already in your habit, change the flag to Jewish, they’re constantly doing it there, they will bomb the house, but it’s not us, the demon beguiled, jinxed karma, and in general it’s self-defense.
      2. washi
        washi 1 June 2013 18: 24
        0
        Sorry, but have you come to these deep thoughts from kindergarten? Yes, you are a genius. I am ready to study Everything that you publish.
        The idea does not come down. She must mature. To do this, you need to process and evaluate a bunch of information, think about it and draw conclusions. The teachings of Marx did not arise from scratch.
    2. T-73
      T-73 18 May 2013 18: 48
      +2
      Thanks for the recommendation. However, who are interested have already read all of several options for Hitler's rise to power. From outside there would not be such a thing as fascism - this is a no brainer. I recommend reading how Lenin came to power. All a few options
    3. dmb
      dmb 19 May 2013 00: 05
      0
      I won’t argue with you otherwise (I’m talking about the arguments of Starikov’s writings. Just as an example I want to cite the next article about 3 spikelets. There, the arguments are supported by evidence, with reference to specific primary sources. Starikov, in the vast majority of gossip, is not supported nothing.
    4. prophet190
      prophet190 19 May 2013 06: 40
      0
      I read it myself a few years ago. In many ways, everything was put in its place.
    5. Ivan.
      Ivan. 19 May 2013 07: 25
      0
      Quote: smile
      In general, the book is amazing ... maybe I’m an illiterate mug, but I rarely come across books that contain so many facts about which I had not even heard before even with my ear.

      Good night, morning Vladimir! I read Starikov and I have a similar opinion, but I will take the liberty of offering a book superior to Starikov in this respect - the only minus is that it is harder to read. The drug Guido Giacomo is HITLER
      Good day!
  • Captain45
    Captain45 18 May 2013 17: 46
    +3
    smile, carbofo liberals sucked you something, did they zaminus? In spite of them, you are +.
    1. carbofo
      carbofo 18 May 2013 20: 39
      +1
      The current liberal patriots only shout as it was shitty.
      And just a little roar at them, immediately under the LGBT they mow the mole they oppress.
  • bobik05
    bobik05 18 May 2013 18: 08
    0
    Truly verb, Nikolai. And now they hate Russians.
  • nevopros
    nevopros 18 May 2013 18: 19
    +1
    See (or rather listen) the first part of the audiobook:
  • T-73
    T-73 18 May 2013 18: 36
    +1
    Yes, Hitler did not prepare for a big war by attacking Poland. The author apparently does not want to mention what happened after 1.09.1939/XNUMX/XNUMX? The Germans walked in a skating rink on the geyrop. And they didn’t go to the ball. There were plans for invasion, planning of military operations and their support. There was a clear rebuilding of the attack machine. Britain would have been crushed - not a question. Who did not give - a question with an answer from the field of speculation. There is a direction - there are no names. I do not forget that N. Starikov (I read your books with interest) always writes that he is trying to answer another question. This is the version. And that the submarine was supposedly not enough - their practice of use showed their effectiveness. It seemed to nobody that they were few. Convoys drowned in the northern latitudes, blocked the Atlantic. It's enough. They would have finished the USSR - and the Pacific would have wept.
  • gregor6549
    gregor6549 18 May 2013 19: 23
    +3
    The article is interesting, but some of the statements in this article are more than controversial. Of course, Hitler's original goal was to unite the German nation by proclaiming a crusade against the "Jewish bourgeois plutocracy" and the German communists, annexing to Germany lands where ethnic Germans constituted a majority or a significant percentage (Austria, Sudetenland, etc. b and, finally, punishment of France for the shame and humiliation of Germany after World War I. At the same time, he was not going to fight either with Poland, or with England, or even more so with the USSR, hoping to peacefully chop off part of Czechoslovakia and get the Danzing corridor through Poland. But neither Poland, nor England , nor France on such a "peace" did not go and what happened happened. World War II began. And then each player began to play his games, trying to get himself out of the blow and expose others. Tried not to miss his chance and the USSR signed the Treaty about non-aggression with Hitler and having won a couple of years to re-equip his army and prepare it for the IMMERSIBLE exactly with Hitler. Why inevitable? Yes, because Hitler does notthere was no other way, except to move to the USSR, after he had a complete bummer with the movement to Great Britain. And she put a lot of effort into making this turn possible as soon as possible. the resources of Great Britain were running out and the convoys from the USA could not replenish them quickly enough due to the actions of the German Navy.
    Of course, the statements of such "writers" as V Rezun, aka "Suvorov", about the so-called. the aggressive plans of the USSR to conquer Europe are built on sand. Stalin could be reproached for various sins (both real and imaginary), but none of his opponents and allies of the highest rank could reproach him for his stupidity.
    Yes, Stalin and the commanders of the KR Army made a bet on a preemptive strike on the Wehrmacht, having forgotten that Hitler might strike the same blow (which Marshal Budyonny warned at the same time at one of the pre-war meetings in the Kremlin when Zhukov wrote how he would attack rapidly Hitler on a dashing horse and with a saber naked)
    Alas, the local and limited experience of such an offensive by Zhukov on Khalkhin Gol played a cruel joke with Stalin, who trusted the "military genius" of Zhukov and Timoshenko and cost the USSR and its Red Army very dearly, which was in all respects (both quantitative and qualitative) on head is stronger than fascist Germany.
    And if Zhukov in his offensive impulse did not expose the Army to the blow that Hitler was the first to strike, Hitler would have come to an end as far back as the 1941 year.
    Is it possible to blame Stalin? If so, it was mainly because he was mistaken in the selection and placement of such personnel as Zhukov and in the fact that the power vertical built by Stalin allowed him to take the initiative only within the framework of orders issued from above.
    All attempts by someone at lower levels of government to take a step left or right were punished immediately and brutally.
    Therefore, until Stalin removed Zhukov from the operational command of the KR Army and took control of himself, such control was simply lost from the very first hours of the war.
    And do not rush to put a minus for such assessments of Zhukov. He did not deserve others. Moreover, he could not have another, since he had neither the appropriate education nor the experience to be a worthy chief of the General Staff of such an army as the KR Army of the USSR.
    Maybe for the post of commander of one of the ridges. wartime detachments, he would have also fit, Such people were more than needed there. Yes, and he would have taken his soul.
    1. T-73
      T-73 18 May 2013 20: 04
      +1
      Zhukov received his minuses from his contemporaries. Your opinion is interesting, but Stalin's "operational management of the Red Army" is somehow too much. Remember history, 1941, no need to nod at the Seelow Heights, then Zhukov took control of the situation. And you say detachments. Khalkin-Gol also showed what is needed to win. Damansky showed what our real military can do
      1. gregor6549
        gregor6549 19 May 2013 04: 30
        -1
        Who said that Stalin was engaged in operational management. For this he had enough "operators". But at the strategic level, more than one decision has not been made without Stalin, since he headed the Headquarters of the Supreme Command and the State Defense Committee. If we talk about Khalkhin Gol, then it is necessary to recall the endless series of orders from Zhukov about executions, about which many wrote, starting with Mikhail Koltsov. And the capture of Seelow Heights under the leadership of the "great strategist" was washed in the blood of Soviet soldiers. So Zhukov's strategy has always been based on one thing: "Victory at any cost." If only to please the Master. Why, in fact, Stalin kept him at his feet, from time to time whipping with a whip or throwing a piece of sugar. Damansky is a completely different story. Yes, and the border guards and ground personnel led by Leonov fought with the Chinese and died like heroes. But this story also showed that the conflict with China caught the USSR by surprise, after which a feverish transfer of all types of troops to the bare Siberian steppes and the construction of a defense line along the Soviet-Chinese border began. Those. again and again all the gaps in the strongly "strategic thinking" of the fathers of the commanders had to be plugged with heroism, with the sweat and blood of the owls of soldiers and officers. Was it different in the recent conflict with Georgia?
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 19 May 2013 20: 02
          -1
          The capture of the Zeelovsky heights was actually justified.

          So Zhukov's strategy has always been based on one thing: "Victory at any cost." If only to please the Master.


          Well, really, just to please the Boss, but the fact that with the defeat of the Khan’s country is such trifles, why tear yourself for it. You are not talking about Zhukov, who was a general from God and had the appropriate manners, but about yourself.
        2. washi
          washi 1 June 2013 18: 32
          0
          Martirosyan Detailed anatomy of betrayal. Unclear, a lot of repetitions, but there is a sense
  • Algor73
    Algor73 18 May 2013 19: 28
    +1
    The longer the war, the more speculation (opinion) about it. Probably no one will ever know the truth, since much has already been lost, much has remained on one side, and many on the other, and each side will present information in a light in which it is beneficial to it. One thing is clear that the USSR and Germany were pushed against their foreheads - Germany was heavily militarized, the USSR also rose from the Ruins of the Grazhldan war. Gigany no one needs. So they wanted to remove two competitors, one with a fascist ideology, the other with a communist one, which were neither acceptable in Europe nor America. In principle, they achieved their goal.
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 19 May 2013 12: 25
      +1
      Quote: Algor73
      One thing is clear that the USSR and Germany pushed their foreheads together

      This is a very controversial moment - since after the quick defeat of the Anglo-French on the continent, there were no serious opponents for the Wehrmacht except the USSR ... To start any territorially remote companies or land on the British Isles with serious Red Army forces on its eastern borders would be simple insanity - therefore, in 1940, Hitler had no choice but to begin preparations for Barbarossa ...
  • Captain45
    Captain45 18 May 2013 19: 41
    +3
    And then on the history of WWII: after 01.09.1939/1940/2050 until May 93, tell me active hostilities between Germany and the allies of occupied Poland, France and Britain. This period is called a "strange war", when the war is declared, but no hostilities are being conducted. Then suddenly the defeat of France, the "catastrophe" in Dunkirk, when the allies were safely evacuated, although according to all the canons of war they had to be stuffed there. Then again the war with aviation, like drumming on the walls and windows of the apartment and waiting for the owner to decide, can accept the conditions. Then Hess's flight to England, the documents on which are classified right up to XNUMX, when probably the last witnesses will die out, and the rest are so badly brainwashed that they will not understand what they are talking about. By the way, as soon as Humpback offered to release Hess from Spandau like this a week later he was found hanged, such as suicide. The old man is XNUMX years old, he could not shave, his hands were shaking, and then he tied the loop and pulled himself up. Probably he could tell a lot. So do not that Gitlnr is white and fluffy From time immemorial, Russia stood with a bone across the throat of Europe, all our lives we interfere with it, from the Vikings to Hitler, everyone is haunted by the territory, our resources, and now even more so.
  • Kazanok
    Kazanok 18 May 2013 19: 47
    -1
    Hitler really wasn’t preparing for war .... well, compared to the USSR .... it’s enough to compare the colossus of the scoop and the poor fellow adik with his pathetic 3 and a half thousand ...
  • datur
    datur 18 May 2013 19: 51
    0
    Lord, it’s like a straightforward random demon !!!!! wink and all I wanted was to raise Germany !!!!! wassat
  • Mirrors
    Mirrors 18 May 2013 19: 51
    0
    The farther into the forest, the thicker the partisans ... There are so many smart people, everyone seems to be reasoning correctly. But on the question of who was going to attack whom, everything is still unclear. Here is the new version that according to the shipbuilding program, we can conclude about Hitler’s goals. Ours controlled German gun oil and the cost of mutton on world markets - they applied their logic to Hitler: when they were going to fight with us, the Germans would use winter guns and sew a lot of sheepskin short fur coats. But Hitler deceived everyone, and why, it is unclear even now. ? Crazy? There are only versions.
    Rezun's version is covered with powerful volleys of BM-13, they do not like him for obvious reasons. Okay, let's drop Rezun. Maybe it was really worth the first attack? After all, Stalin was not stopped by world public opinion when troops were sent to Poland and during the attack on Finland? Maybe we would have won the Patriotic War with less losses? And everything is again dark and obscure. There are many versions again.
    Back in Soviet times, I read books in which Stalin was accused of liquidating fortified areas, concentrating the bulk of the troops on the border, not bringing these troops into combat readiness, etc. And I thought, were our military commanders such idiots? The version about preparing for the attack was the first to at least allow us to think that they were definitely not fools.
    So where is the truth?
    1. T-73
      T-73 18 May 2013 20: 14
      -1
      she, as always, is in the middle. But! documents are not declassified so far. The leader is England. the question of an attack on the geyropa with BT tanks is a myth () Rezunsky, by the way. It was visible and read, though not in Soviet times - in the USSR I didn’t even consider such a thing :-), the same T-34 was adopted in the tracked version, although there was also a tracked-wheeled version. Level URA, cavalry attack tanks in the fields - brilliant!
      1. Alex
        Alex 22 August 2013 00: 33
        +2
        Quote: T-73
        The T-34 was adopted in the tracked version, although there was a tracked-wheeled version.

        The T-34 never existed in a wheeled-tracked version, like its predecessor, the T-32. The only (and last) car of this class is the experimental A-20, which Koshkin himself opposed.

        the question of an attack on a geyropa with BT tanks - a myth

        Is there evidence for this? Or from the series "this cannot be, because this can never be." BT tanks were superior to German T-IIIs (it's better not to stutter about the rest) in almost all characteristics. Add all the rest (and the old T-26 of all modifications, and the still quite suitable T-28, and all the T-34 and KV), the assumed air domination (when striking airfields, this is a completely realistic scenario) - than 20 thousand tanks ( of which about 8000 - BT) is not war? Or did Hitler attack us with something fundamentally better ???
    2. d.gksueyjd
      d.gksueyjd 18 May 2013 20: 40
      +1
      The truth will be known when secrecy is removed (if removed) from documents related to the period 1933-1949. in all countries, both from the allies of Germany and from the allies of the USSR.
    3. gregor6549
      gregor6549 19 May 2013 07: 41
      -1
      I believe one must distinguish between the terms "attack" and "preemptive or pre-emptive strike".
      In my very unenlightened opinion, Kr. The army, having intelligence data on Hitler’s plans to start a war against the USSR (and such data, and very accurate, was more than enough to evaluate Hitler’s intentions) and having the advantage in forces and means, was not preparing an attack on Germany but a preemptive strike on the Wehrmacht in the form deep offensive operation.
      Hitler was weakened by the Army’s decision to bring the rebellious Yugoslavia to its knees because of what the attack on the USSR instead of mid-May (which awaited the leadership of the USSR) began in late June. This was perceived in the USSR as Hitler’s doubts about whether to fight against the USSR or not, and that the USSR still had time to prepare a crushing blow to Hitler before he decided to attack.
      And when intelligence reported that he had nevertheless made up his mind, there was no longer any time to change previous plans and bring them to the troops. That’s why they started to fight according to previous plans providing for a preemptive strike but not at all providing for defensive actions when delivering such an attack by the enemy.
      At least the #3 directive and what the military commanders had in sealed envelopes (thrown into the trash immediately after opening) confirms this. The same bridges in Brest across the Mukhavets river were not blown up, because according to them it was planned to launch the advancing Kr Army and not the advancing Wehrmacht. Therefore, I do not want it, but I must admit that Hitler and his generals outplayed Stalin with his generals and ahead of the Kr Army. Just a week, but ahead of it, and that was enough for everything to go awry.
      Kr Army was perfectly prepared to advance, but was in no way prepared to defend.
      And when the order to attack came (directive # 3), it turned out to be simply unrealistic, i.e. impracticable. The main task of the soldiers of the Red Army was not the task of attacking, but the task of breaking out of the cauldrons and surviving. Someone could not escape and he fought to the last, someone preferred to surrender, not understanding what awaited him there, etc. My opinion is based, among other things, on the fact that a whole department of "tacticians" worked for me for many years. composed of former members of the Army Owls, some of them went through the entire war from Brest to Berlin. Among them was, in particular, Colonel General of the Aviation Reserve Zhukovsky V.Ya. These people told a lot about that war, stipulating, however, their half-revelations with a request not to take what they heard outside the gates of the enterprise. Nobody could stand it. The concepts of secrecy were then firmly hammered into the heads of all employees, and what was said at work was never discussed at home, even with the closest relatives. But this same secrecy, as a result, led to the fact that the vacuum of reliable knowledge was instantly filled with "fictions" of all sorts of specialists in the history of the Second World War, who bred in incredible numbers after Gorbachev and Yeltsin came to power. And since these experts piled up both facts and fabrications, it will be many years to sort out the resulting mess, and then on condition that the disassembly will be carried out systematically and not spontaneously, on the basis of genuine documents, which it is high time to declassify and not to please the next fluctuations in the line of the ruling party today
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 19 May 2013 19: 03
        0
        Nobody relaxed the Red Army, it’s difficult to make a decision in the face of conflicting information.

        Kr Army was perfectly prepared to advance, but was in no way prepared to defend.


        Any advancing army on a wide front defends itself everywhere, except for a narrow section of the breakthrough, the battles on which do not allow the enemy to attack himself. Often offensives on different flanks go simultaneously. There is no other way to win than to set offensive tasks for the adversary.
        1. Alex
          Alex 22 August 2013 21: 36
          +2
          I am absolutely sure that you, colleague, do not confuse tactical defense (you are talking about it) with strategic defense. It was to her that the Red Army was not ready in principle, and it was to her that they crossed at the end of the 1941 year.
          And the Wehrmacht, at the very peak of its offensive, also often switched to short-term tactical defense in those areas where it could not immediately break the resistance of the Red Army. You are right, defense and offensive are two sides of the same coin, whose name is victory.
      2. Avenger711
        Avenger711 19 May 2013 20: 04
        0
        And to break out of the boiler do not need to step? And then they usually beat me on both sides.
      3. Alex
        Alex 22 August 2013 21: 32
        +2
        Quote: gregor6549
        having an advantage in manpower and means, she was preparing not an attack on Germany but a preemptive strike on the Wehrmacht in the form of a deep offensive operation.

        How deep? To Warsaw? To Berlin? To Paris? There were Germans everywhere. And in general, I don’t remember the case that a successfully advancing army that far exceeded the enemy and defeated him in the first battles (there is no doubt about that, the situation was mirror symmetric then) would be limited to some half measures. To smash the enemy, so to smash.

        In 1936, the film "Three Tankers" was released (not to be confused with "Tractor Drivers", where the song of the same name sounded), so it very clearly explained with whom and how to fight. And in the very near future.
  • T-73
    T-73 18 May 2013 20: 20
    0
    in general, the article is similar to some opinion poll. What will cause the greatest response, then we will read in the next book of the author of the article. What’s called - keep your nose bowed, and May 9 has just passed, everything is in the subject, here’s the story about the war (next)
  • individual
    individual 18 May 2013 20: 45
    0
    I am amazed at Western propaganda, seeing the past in a "distorting mirror", where everything is opposed, as in the old cinema, negative and positive. In my opinion, we and they live in different dimensions. Examples please:
    The results of the Second World War, as if they flew from Mars and these "Martians" will not understand in any way who bent fascism into a ram's horn, who saved their Europe and the World from the fascist plague;
    Morality and morality, values ​​and culture of world civilization are rejected by them. This is the road to nowhere, into the abyss of self-destruction;
    A respectable family is rejected with Mom, Dad and their beloved children.
    But the fakes and speculations with the analysis of Hitler's plans and his mistakes do not bother us. We destroyed it and it is a FACT.
  • Snoop
    Snoop 18 May 2013 20: 46
    +3
    The article lacks reasoning about the purpose of Hess's flight to England. In Germany, naturally then they recognized him as crazy and all that. Interestingly, in 2010, the British had to declassify materials on Hess. Interrogation protocols, transcripts of conversations. Historians joyfully rubbed their hands. But ... the British in 2010 extended the secrecy by another N years))) Looks like there is something that is unprofitable for the British to make public)))
    1. Mirrors
      Mirrors 18 May 2013 20: 55
      0
      Oh, I’m sure that both England and the USA have something to hide. There were no saints in that political mess - and who could be blamed for the fact that everyone pursued his own interests. But I want to know something, finally! The war was over 60 years ago!
      1. Algor73
        Algor73 18 May 2013 21: 15
        +1
        We never know the truth. We will always argue, makes arguments in favor of a particular version. And the truth in this situation, as was said, is somewhere in between.
        1. smile
          smile 18 May 2013 22: 55
          +1
          Algor73
          About the truth, you're right .... but about the truth - for example, I say that twice two-10, and Gogi, well, five, six, but they don’t desy ... and then you come and say - no, guys - the truth is in the middle! :)))) ... okay, I'm joking ... it's just that very rarely the truth is in the middle ... I think so! :))))
        2. yurta2013
          yurta2013 19 May 2013 09: 29
          +1
          The whole truth will be known only when all archives are opened and all state secrets are removed. Today you can only get as close as possible to her.
  • Captain45
    Captain45 18 May 2013 22: 20
    +1
    The truth is one - 22.06.1941 not the USSR attacked Germany and 2.05.1945 the Soviet flag over the defeated Reichstag, and not vice versa, everything else is from the evil one.
  • AntonR7
    AntonR7 18 May 2013 22: 39
    0
    Yes, he was preparing as it should, counting on a blitzkrieg, but crap.
  • Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 18 May 2013 23: 33
    +1
    The truth of that war was written in the blood of our fathers and grandfathers! I propose to end the "debate" ...
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 19 May 2013 04: 38
      +2
      I agree, the question remains when this truth will become available to everyone. Without this, it is impossible to distinguish where the truth is and where is nonsense. My father also fought from the first day of the war and was saved only by the fact that he was wounded by a shrapnel in a lung near Bryansk. So he died with this splinter. As with the question of why everything happened, how it happened. those. instead of defeating the doctor with little blood and on foreign territory, the first defeat of the KR Army on its own territory turned out, and the defeat of the enemy cost more than a lot of blood. So the heroism and sacrifice of the fighters are separate and the ability of "strategists" to think and fight separately.
      1. gregor6549
        gregor6549 19 May 2013 06: 17
        0
        My apologies for the confusion. Still, the English "klava" is not the best way to communicate in Russian.
    2. yurta2013
      yurta2013 19 May 2013 09: 26
      +1
      Unwillingness to deal with the causes of our defeats and the great losses in the Second World War can turn into the blood of our children and grandchildren.
      1. gregor6549
        gregor6549 20 May 2013 18: 11
        0
        Golden words, they would still be poured into worthy brains.
        1. yurta2013
          yurta2013 21 May 2013 17: 34
          0
          "Golden words" are not born in "unworthy brains".
  • zbidnev
    zbidnev 19 May 2013 09: 43
    +1
    Good article!!! I think many facts of this war are still classified and whether we know about them is not known. It remains to proceed from well-known historical events. Recall that the outbreak of the war was preceded by the seizure of the industrially developed territories of Europe with the complete connivance of England and France (the seizure of Czechoslovakia and Austria). Poland simply betrayed an ally by imitating a type of war on the western front. Well, the complete defeat of France and England is not the best moments of their history. Naturally, you need to whitewash your European democratic mistakes, denigrate the victories of your enemy (including the USSR). The task is not difficult - we take V. Suvorov, etc. we are writing to him or he is the image of the terrible enemy of the USSR who was preparing for the entire conscious history for a campaign on enlightened Europe. We greatly reduce the mental potential of Hitler (I will not write this reptile with a capital letter). I wonder what was the intelligence of the Democrats which this defective tulle pressed. The Soviet armed forces that broke down this entire European war machine (not only the German one !!!) and the Japanese ground forces are a huge crowd running without weapons at German tanks and machine guns and defeating them in huge numbers. And an oil painting. Does this remind you of anything?
  • newcomer
    newcomer 19 May 2013 10: 19
    0
    Quote: djon3volta
    he himself came up with something, or who suggested?

    it means that it’s interesting about the NKVD screening, and the main point of the question (that they all abandoned and ran) you, as I see it, is beyond doubt ...
  • Svyatoslav72
    Svyatoslav72 19 May 2013 11: 04
    0
    1. A.G. - possessed charisma and was a reformer of Germany, such in ancient times were called Prophets or Shamans, besides that he was an empath. Such people easily understand instinctively what most will not understand until the end of their days. He was not supposed to rule, but was supposed to be a spiritual leader and teacher. The energy from which he was "charged" and understood, made him a slave to "star fever" and dependent on "favorable influence". Therefore, he began to make Global mistakes more often than the more negative accumulated, in all directions in the history of Germany from 39-45.
    2. The military-industrial complex of Germany was not National Socialist, but was Capitalist, from this high costs and weak efficiency, corruption and sabotage of those plans and tasks that were set by the Policy of A.G. (NSDAP) (Profit above all, and not Germany above everything). They also successfully overwhelmed the rearmament of the tank fleet before the invasion of the USSR, and G. Goering "hacked" the development and equipping of military aviation (Failed "Battle of Britain", with his mediocre leadership. He did not provide, but assured that he would save the 100th Army by 6% Paulus in Stalingrad. He did not "close" Vaterland, he carpet bombing, as he played into narcissism fetishism and was a drug addicted careerist. He created his own Army (Airfield divisions) which greatly damaged the Wehrmacht Air Force and SS).
    3. AG (Germany) led two military campaigns when he started the third with the USSR, this was the biggest mistake and gigantic stupidity. Moreover, the first two were not provided 100% in terms of supply and composition, Germany did not have enough reserves either material or human. When E. Rommel learned that the war with the USSR had begun, he said: - Ah! from where will we get the supply now? Losses in the first digs (Poland and France) showed the weakness of the tank fleet and the lack of mobility of ground forces (foot movement and horse traction). That is, the modern Army of Germany was not sufficiently equipped and armed, especially for a protracted war in a large territorial space. Not very effective actions in Scandinavia and unsuccessful ("Pirov Victory") landing operation in Crete, showed the weakness of the Navy and Air Force.
    4. Supply and replenishment, was not provided with internal potential and reserves (neither technical nor material nor human food, ANYTHING). Germany's allies, to put it mildly, were not even "second-rate": The Italians were not even able, and did not want, to provide Rommel in Africa, "leaked" information on convoys out of carelessness and envy; Finns - sabotaged participation in the war, stopped at the liberated Leningrad border; The Romanians - more distinguished themselves by looting and mockery of the civilian population, guaranteed the encirclement of Paulus at Stalingrad; The Hungarians, although they had more desire than the Italians and Romanians, were also not sufficiently armed and ready for modern warfare. According to some reports, they were more effective than many of Germany's allies. I'm not talking about the Wafen-SS, which have always been distinguished by their best fighting qualities and fanatical tenacity, not inferior to the SS (purely German national "Guard detachments").
    5. Tactics and Strategy. Time and theater of operations, as well as the enemy, require adequate mass-technical weapons and equipment (superiority or parity), everything has its own mission, which provides effective action both in tactical actions and in strategic plans. Germany did not have: Air Strategic Forces; Marine Tactical and Strategic compounds; insufficient ground forces for the purposes that A.G.
    PS Germany could not run the companies that she led, could not win what she got into. Hitler did not prepare for war, he wanted to win in it due to the weakness of others.
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 19 May 2013 11: 30
      +2
      Losses in the first digging (Poland and France) showed the weakness of the tank fleet and the lack of mobility of the ground forces (foot movement and horsepower). That is, the modern German Army was not sufficiently equipped and armed, especially for a protracted war in a large territorial space.
      Wehrmacht operations to defeat Poland and France can be called brilliant in terms of military strategy ... The first was broken in two weeks and the second in a month and a half !!! And these are some of the largest European states ... The British and French were draping so that they barely managed to evacuate for the La Manche ... Where is it even better? Are you writing about any shortcomings? The operation in Norway (given the remoteness of the region from Germany and the complex nature of the area) can also be said to have been performed perfectly !!! Maybe not without errors, but I think that the leadership of the Wehrmacht took this into account ...

      PS Germany couldn’t run the companies she led, couldn’t win what she got into

      Everything is correct but exactly the opposite !!! In the prewar years, Germany planned everything perfectly based on its own strengths and capabilities ... And in the 41st year it practically defeated the USSR army in border battles and was a step away from the complete defeat of the enemy - and only thanks to the incredible stamina and self-sacrifice of the Soviet people our country I could survive in this terrible time !!!
      1. Babon
        Babon 19 May 2013 11: 34
        +2
        Absolutely correct remark. The Polish army was considered strong and well-armed. Well, everyone knows about France. Here the Czechs, with such an army, could really confront Germany. Well, as it turned out, everyone knows. And after all, in France there were another 300 British who darted to Dunkirk.
  • Selevc
    Selevc 19 May 2013 11: 11
    +3
    The article as a whole is delusional - the fact is that Germany was preparing for the Great War even before Hitler came to power ... And this process took place in the most difficult conditions of restrictions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles ... Germany was trying with all her might to get up from her knees and for this she used any means and methods - including active military cooperation with the USSR ... The Fritzes played with us for a while as "friends" while it was profitable for them - and when they intensified to play revolution and socialism there was no point ...

    Germany was actively preparing for a war, taking into account the mistakes of the 1st World War - Blitzkrieg tactics were invented to combat a possible war on a 2-front ... The Germans, by the way, better than anyone knew what the next war would be in Europe - unlike, say, the French and British ... Hence their initial successes ...

    Yes, Germany had errors in the construction of the Navy - but who did not have them? The fact that Hitler was fond of building battleships - it was a world fashion and all the major countries built this superweapon - which did not entirely justify the investment ... It was senseless to build aircraft carriers for Hitler as he was unrealistic with England as a whole and I think that he understood this perfectly ... Only submarines remained ...
    1. Babon
      Babon 19 May 2013 11: 25
      0
      All the same, convince me that the Weimar Republic was preparing for war. And in Germany, the Communists almost came to power. With the humbled sense of pride of the Germans, you are absolutely right. How they looked for a trailer in which they signed capitulation in World War I to humiliate the French, an eloquent fact.
      1. Selevc
        Selevc 19 May 2013 12: 12
        +1
        Quote: Babon
        All the same, convince me that the Weimar Republic was preparing for war.

        During the times of the Weimar Republic, Germany was still weak, but nevertheless maintained active military cooperation with various world powers, and primarily with the USSR ... There was construction and joint use of military training grounds on the territory of the USSR and joint training and training of military specialists ... After all, Germany could secretly prepare an army for a new Great War on the territory of the USSR ... Just in the late 20s and early 30s, the USSR industry made a breakthrough in the development of new advanced technologies - I think this was done not without the help of Germany, the Germans supplied in the Union, modern equipment and machine tools in exchange for resources and food ...

        I quote the historian Igor Pykhalov: “... not a“ fascist sword was forged in the USSR, ”but, on the contrary, German experts in the 1920s and early 1930s helped create a base for our tank, aviation, and chemical industries in our country. Thus, the foundations of the Soviet military-industrial complex were laid largely due to military-technical cooperation with Germany. "

        But you can argue with this very historian - what does it mean "German specialists helped" ... Are they good magicians? No, it was mutual cooperation - so I think that both Soviet specialists and the country as a whole helped Germany a lot in the pre-war period ...
        1. Babon
          Babon 19 May 2013 13: 02
          0
          Almost convinced, it’s time for me to study the story, it’s always interesting to learn new facts. But not yet to the end, I’ll study it myself))
    2. yurta2013
      yurta2013 19 May 2013 16: 37
      +1
      On the whole, I agree, but I think that in the 20s, it was not the government of the Weimar Republic (social democrats) that was preparing for the Great War, but the Reichswehr and various nationalist and fascist groups within Germany.
  • unknown
    unknown 19 May 2013 14: 36
    0
    Hitler did not seek world domination.
    Germany lived the whole war on credit.
    As a participant in the WWI, he sought to restore Germany's position among the great powers.
    The theory of life idleness generally created by the British
    The United States and Great Britain were still interested in a new war. The United States sought to destroy the British and French colonial empires. Great Britain sought to preserve its empire.
    If Rezun was already mentioned here, then Germany really became the "icebreaker of the revolution." But only in the hands of Great Britain. Stalin played his own game, but in fact, in the interests of the United States. Probably agreed in the late 20s. It was then that Leiba Bronstein, who represented the interests of the United States during the October coup, was kicked out. At the same time, American investments in the USSR began, and Stalin gave up the gold ducat.
    It was the United States that benefited the most from this war. But Britain lost. Germany, as always, remained extreme. And we suffered the greatest losses.
    1. vladim.gorbunow
      vladim.gorbunow 21 May 2013 17: 36
      0
      Sorry, I liked your comment, but I wanted to clarify something, albeit late. "US and UK are interested." Union "I" in describing their relations in the 30s is inadmissible. Only the adverb "against" is appropriate. I gave some texture of their Great friendship in the comments above. The United States was preparing at a monstrous pace for a clash with Britain. They say it was against Japan. But then it was enough to interrupt technological and raw material aid to the Japanese, in which the United States ousted Britain. And the contradictions with which were of a global nature. All other players had regional interests and appetites. The United States was able to build with them, that is, with Germany, Japan, China, the USSR, a system of informal, conspiratorial relations based on their dependence on the supply of strategic materials and technologies from the outside. That is why Hitler. having accurately fulfilled the contract for the attack on England, having American secret supplies, he waited throughout the war for American mediation in concluding peace with her and cursed Roosevelt. And there was an alliance with the USSR, only it should be dated to the year 32, the arrival of the Roosevelt administration. Remember, Eleanor Roosevelt and Mellon were presented with paintings from the Hermitage. Although based on amerskoy aid in the gradient construction of the first five-year plan and the participation of 100 amers in them. How Churchill was squeezed with his help is well known. For example, the "Unthinkable", Churchill in the spring of 000 kept the German divisions surrendering to him under arms. The goal is to play off amers and councils and slightly swim out like a great power himself. Remaining at the helm then, the Roosevelts sent troops into the British zone, disarmed the Germans and overtook them. Then up to 45 million prisoners, just in case, were starved to death and dysentery.
  • Avenger711
    Avenger711 19 May 2013 15: 05
    +1
    I'm wondering how the notorious West could even force Hitler, who controlled the whole of Europe, to attack someone. Did England make him from her island? Adolf himself made it clear where Germany should go and what territories "the German sword should clear for the German plow." So no one forced him, and to draw conclusions only on the presence / absence of warm clothes is very naive, from the beginning of the War to the moment when theoretically it can become VERY cold for 5 months. France lost the war in 1 month. The USSR would also have lost in fact, if on December 1.12.1941, 25, it had not taken out everything that is possible and IMPOSSIBLE to the east, well, the war would have stopped for a while, in April the roads dried up and that's it, the Red Army without supplies would have been calmly finished off. In reality, it did not stop, but on the contrary, the Red Army, re-equipped with pre-war reserves and newly manufactured weapons, went on the offensive and companies of 40 people fell down. It’s really hard to foresee that the Russians will have ready-made foundations in the east with supplied communications on which they will immediately put machines, as well as plans to export everything valuable, right down to the last nut. And regarding sheepskin coats, well, the influence of frost on the Germans is exaggerated, but on the Russians it is underestimated. At -XNUMX and a Russian peasant won't stick his nose out of the house, but running into the attack is generally super extreme, so ours also suffered from frost. Stalingrad is generally a supply crisis at all levels, a complete disruption of the transport system led to the fact that the Germans, starving to the point of stupidity, often could not get to the available supplies.
    1. Sun-faced
      Sun-faced 19 May 2013 15: 11
      -4
      Quote: Avenger711
      Did England force him from his island?

      And then. Canaris (head of Abwehr) was an English spy. It was beneficial for the British that the mustachioed beat the face of the mustachioed.
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 19 May 2013 18: 57
        0
        Canaris was far from deciding everything, and they could also send him. I do not dispute the version that Canaris is an agent of influence, but it is very clearly problematic to influence.
    2. Babon
      Babon 20 May 2013 12: 07
      0
      And here it is already necessary to consider the Western mentality. It is very different from ours. They will always try to live off the weaker, and try to take away from the weaker. They live in society and have a loser, but there is a user who steers, and can take everything away from the loser. I’m watching their Viasat History channel, they calmly and normally tell how their armies invade other countries and explain that they are good for those countries. Specifically about the USSR, they tell how their reconnaissance aircraft flew into our territory. And the bad Russians shot down the heroes of the pilots. They are not at all ashamed to think that their pilots were shot down on our territory. Yes, the whole story is studied as the West needs. They discovered all this (the whole world) and everywhere they bring good. So Hitler knew that they would not allow him, just like that, to make Germany a user country, he knew better than us the mentality of Europeans, so he gave it to the French. Now little is written about Poland, but then Poland was a very aggressive state, they were ready to fight with Germany and us, and they got theirs.
  • heavytank
    heavytank 19 May 2013 19: 47
    0
    that's for sure !!! If the USSR does not fall until 1943, the United States itself will fight with the Germans, such was the agreement! and for Hitler Sentence
  • The comment was deleted.
  • alert_timka
    alert_timka 19 May 2013 22: 13
    0
    After reading articles on history, I came to one conclusion (that is, this is purely my opinion), the war between Germany and the USSR became possible because Hitler and Stalin terribly began to distrust each other. Stalin thought (if someone thinks that Stalin did not think about this, then he is mistaken not so simple, he was not so far-sighted) that the Germans would attack anyway and Hitler also thought that the Russians would start first. Both sides were preparing for war, so they divided Poland together on September 1, 39, and then porridge began. As Macedonian said, there would be no two suns in the sky, so that one empire should overwhelm the other by any other way. Sorry for the people killed by millions.
    1. TURAR
      TURAR 20 May 2013 10: 14
      0
      "Only after the German state includes in the framework
      of its borders the last German, only after it turns out that such
      Germany is not able to feed - enough of all its
      population - the need arises gives the people a moral right to
      acquisition of foreign lands. Then the sword begins to play the role of a plow, then
      bloody tears of war ruffle the land that should provide bread
      urgent for future generations
      "Hitler" My Struggle "
      So do not flatter yourself. There were no disagreements!
    2. yurta2013
      yurta2013 20 May 2013 16: 45
      0
      Almost everything is true, except for the word "steel". Hitler and Stalin initially could not trust each other, since they were the leaders of irreconcilably warring parties and, in addition, Stalin was well aware of Hitler's plans for expanding Germany to the East, and not only at the expense of Poland.
  • We fought, we know
    We fought, we know 20 May 2013 00: 14
    -1
    What could be the war with the USSR, if in 1939 joint parades in Brest and the training of German pilots in Lipetsk and German tankmen in Kazan. The last train loaded with nickel left for the Third Reich on June 22, after they bombed Kiev and the Brest Fortress, and arrived on 23, where the Gestapo arrested all those accompanying him and kept him in a concentration camp until the end of the war. Upon returning to the USSR, all 7 people were sentenced to different terms.