Military Review

Red Army - a view from the enemy

87
Red Army - a view from the enemy
Studying the memoirs of the military leaders of the First and Second World Wars (both on one side and on the other), we pay special attention to the work of commanders and staffs in developing and making decisions on command and control of troops. One of the most important factors in the decision-making process is how the commander evaluates his opponent. Practice shows that in memoirs it is rather difficult to find a real characterization given to one's opponent. In this regard, the book of the major general tank Wehrmacht troops F. Melentin is an exception. It is one of the few that gives an objective and complete description of the soldiers of the Red Army. We believe that this material will be of interest to many. The material is cited from the publication: Mellentin F.V. Tank battles 1939-1945 .: Combat use of tanks in the Second World War. - M.: IL, 1957.


For reference: Mellenthin Friedrich von Wilhelm, Major General of Tank Forces. On the Eastern Front, he was Chief of Staff of the 48 tank corps, and then Chief of Staff of the Tank Army 4. Took part in the battles of Stalingrad and Kursk.

Red Army

Over the years, the value of the experience gained by German troops in the war with Russia will decline, and a new assessment of the Russian military capabilities will be required. Nevertheless, the character and qualities of the Russian soldier, as well as the methods of warfare typical for him, are unlikely to change significantly. Therefore, the experience of the Second World War is a reliable basis for a correct assessment of Russia's military might.

1. Psychology of a Russian soldier

It can almost be said with certainty that not a single cultural inhabitant of the West will ever understand the character and soul of the Russians. Knowledge of the Russian character can serve as a key to understanding the fighting qualities of a Russian soldier, his advantages and methods of his struggle on the battlefield. Resilience and peace of mind of a fighter have always been paramount factors in the war and often in their significance turned out to be more important than the number and equipment of the troops. This is a well-known position for the Second World War; I think it will remain valid in the future.
One can never say in advance what the Russian will undertake: as a rule, he rushes from one extreme to another. His nature is as unusual and complex as this huge and incomprehensible country itself. It is difficult to imagine the limits of his patience and endurance, he is extraordinarily bold and courageous and, nevertheless, at times shows cowardice. There were cases when the Russian units, selflessly repelled all the attacks of the Germans, suddenly ran in front of small assault groups. Sometimes the Russian infantry battalions were confused after the very first shots, and the next day the same units fought with fanatical stamina.

Russians are very inconsistent: today they show no concern about securing their flanks, and tomorrow the thought that their flanks are in danger threatens them. The Russian soldier treats generally accepted tactical principles with disdain, but, at the same time, tries to follow the letter of his charters completely.

His personality is fragile, it is easily dissolved in mass; another thing is patience and endurance - character traits that have developed over many centuries. Thanks to the natural strength of these qualities, Russians are in many ways superior to the more conscious soldier of the West.
In a crowd, he is full of hatred and unusually cruel, one - it is friendly and generous. These qualities are typical for Russians - residents of the Asian part of the country, Mongols, Turkmen and Uzbeks, as well as for the Slavs living west of the Urals.

The Russian soldier loves his "mother Russia", and therefore he fights for the communist regime, although, generally speaking, he is not a political fanatic. However, it should be borne in mind that the party and its organs have enormous influence in the Red Army. Almost all commissioners are residents of cities and people from the working class. Their courage borders on recklessness; these people are very smart and determined. They managed to create in the Russian army what it lacked in World War I — iron discipline. Such a military discipline that knows no pity — which, I am sure, no other army could have withstood — turned the unorganized crowd into an unusually powerful weapon of war. Discipline - the main trump card of communism, the driving force of the army. She was also a decisive factor in achieving the great political and military successes of Stalin.

Russian remains a good soldier everywhere and in any conditions. In the age of the atomic weapons All this can be very important. One of the main advantages of Russia will be its ability to withstand the enormous destruction and bloody battles, as well as the ability to make unusually heavy demands on the population and the army in the field.

The problem of providing troops with food for the Russian command is of secondary importance, since the Russians in fact do not need a centralized army supply. The field kitchen, almost sacred in the eyes of the soldiers of other armies, is only a pleasant surprise for the Russians, and they can do without it all day and week. A Russian soldier is completely satisfied with a handful of millet or rice, adding to them what nature gives him. Such proximity to nature explains the ability of a Russian to become, as it were, a part of the earth, literally dissolving in it.

The soldier of the Russian army is an unsurpassed master of disguise and self-digging, as well as field fortification. He digs into the ground with incredible speed and so skillfully adapts to the terrain that it is almost impossible to detect. The Russian soldier, skillfully entrenched and well disguised, clings tightly to Mother Earth and, therefore, is doubly dangerous as an enemy. Often, even a long and careful observation is unsuccessful - the position of the Russians cannot be found. Therefore, extreme caution should be exercised, even if the terrain is known to be free from enemy.

The industrialization of the Soviet Union gave the Red Army new equipment and a large number of highly qualified specialists. The Russians quickly learned to use new types of weapons and, oddly enough, proved themselves capable of conducting combat operations using sophisticated military equipment.

Carefully selected specialists helped the rank and file to master modern military equipment, and it must be said that the Russians had achieved great success, especially in the communications troops. The longer the war dragged on, the better the Russian signalmen worked, the more skillfully they used radio interception, interfered and transmitted false messages.
To some extent, the high fighting qualities of the Russians are reduced by their natural laziness. However, during the war, the Russians constantly improved, and their top commanders and staffs received a lot of useful information by studying the experience of the combat operations of their troops and the German army. They learned to react quickly to any changes in the situation, to act energetically and resolutely.

Certainly, in the person of Zhukov, Konev, Vatutin and Vasilevsky, Russia had highly gifted commanders of armies and fronts. Junior commanders and often middle managers still suffered from sluggishness and inability to make independent decisions - because of the harsh disciplinary actions, they were afraid to take responsibility. A pattern in the training of commanders of small units led to the fact that they were accustomed not to go beyond the charters and instructions and were deprived of initiative and individuality, which is very important for a good commander. Russian soldiers and junior commanders were instinctively aware that, if left to their own devices, they would die. In this instinct, one can see the roots of both panic and the greatest heroism and self-sacrifice.

Despite these shortcomings, the Russian as a whole is certainly an excellent soldier and, with skillful leadership, is a dangerous adversary. It would be a serious mistake to underestimate him, although he, of course, does not fully meet the requirements of the soldiers of modern war. The strength of the soldier of the West lies in his personal qualities, high level of mental and spiritual development and the ability to act independently. It is difficult for veterans of World War II to believe that an ordinary Russian soldier will be capable of independent action. However, Russian is so full of contradictions that it would be a mistake not to take into account even this quality, which, quite possibly, is in its latent state.

The skillful and persistent work of the Communists has led to the fact that since 1917, Russia has changed in the most amazing way. There can be no doubt that the Russian is increasingly developing the skill of independent actions, and his level of education is constantly growing. It is possible that over a long period of preparation in a peaceful environment, he will develop a personal initiative.
Military leaders will certainly contribute in every way to such an evolution. The Russian high command knows its business better than the command of any other army. It is fully aware of the weaknesses of its armed forces and will do everything possible to eliminate the existing shortcomings. There is reason to assume that, at present, the methods of military training in Russia are aimed at developing the skills of independent actions of a single soldier and at educating younger officers of creative initiative. Of course, developing independence and critical thinking is dangerous for the communist regime, and therefore it is difficult to link this tendency with ruthless and unquestioning discipline. But, given the long period of peaceful development, it can be assumed that the Red Army, in all likelihood, will be able to find a compromise solution.

2. Russian tactics

The conduct of military operations by the Russians, especially in the offensive, is characterized by the use of a large number of manpower and equipment, which the command often introduces recklessly and stubbornly into battle, but achieves success.

Russians have always been famous for their contempt for death; the communist regime has further developed this quality, and now massive Russian attacks are more effective than ever before. Twice attempted attack will be repeated for the third and fourth time, despite the losses suffered, and the third and fourth attacks will be carried out with the same stubbornness and composure.
Until the very end of the war, the Russians, not paying attention to the huge losses, threw the infantry into the attack almost in close formation. Due to the superiority in numbers, this method has achieved many major successes. However, experience shows that such massive attacks can be sustained if the defenders are well prepared, have enough weapons and operate under the guidance of determined commanders.

Russian divisions, which had a very large composition, attacked, as a rule, on a narrow front. The terrain before the front of the defenders in the blink of an eye was suddenly filled with Russians. They appeared as if from under the ground, and it seemed impossible to contain the oncoming avalanche. The huge gaps from our fire were immediately filled; waves of infantry rolled one after another, and only when the human reserves were running out could they roll back. Infrequently, they did not retreat, but uncontrollably rushed forward. The reflection of this kind of attack depends not so much on the availability of technology, but rather on whether the nerves will survive.

Only battle-hardened soldiers were able to overcome the fear that encompassed everyone. Only a soldier who is aware of his duty and believes in himself, only those who have learned to act relying on themselves will be able to withstand the terrible tension of a Russian massive attack,
After 1941, masses of tanks added to the masses of Russians. It was, of course, much harder to repel such attacks, and it cost much more nervous tension.
Although the Russians, it seems to me, are not too strong in the art of creating improvised units, they understand how important it is at any time to have new troops in readiness to replace broken and battered units, and in general know how to do it. They replaced their bloodless parts with surprising speed.

Russian true masters of trickle - a form of warfare in which they have no equal. I also paid attention to their persistent desire to create bridgeheads or any other positions advanced. I must emphasize that if you even reconcile with the capture of the bridgehead by the Russians for a while, this can lead to fatal consequences. More and more new infantry units, tanks and artillery will approach the bridgehead, and this will continue until the offensive finally begins with it.

Russian prefer to make the movement of their troops at night and show with great art. However, they do not like to spend broad offensive actions at night - apparently, they understand that junior commanders are not sufficiently prepared for this. But night attacks with a limited goal (to restore the lost position or to facilitate the planned for the daytime offensive) they carry out.

In the fight against the Russians, it is necessary to get used to the new forms of hostilities. They must be ruthless, quick and flexible. You should never be complacent. Everyone should be prepared for any surprises, as anything can happen. It is not enough to fight in accordance with well-proven tactical positions, because no one can say with any certainty what the Russian response will be. It is impossible to predict how the Russians will react to their environment, a sudden attack, military cunning, etc.
In many cases, Russians rely on their innate instinct more than on existing tactical principles, and it must be recognized that instinct often brings them more benefits than training in many academies could provide. At first glance, their actions may seem incomprehensible, but they often fully justify themselves.

The Russians had one tactical mistake, which they could not eradicate, despite the brutal lessons. I mean their almost superstitious belief in the importance of mastering the highlands. They attacked at any height and fought for it with great tenacity, without attaching importance to its tactical value. It happened many times that mastering such a height was not dictated by tactical necessity, but the Russians never understood this and suffered heavy losses.

3.Characteristics of different types of troops

My remarks so far concerned mainly the actions of the Russian infantry, which during the Second World War fully preserved the great traditions of Suvorov and Skobelev.

Despite the enormous progress of military equipment, the Russian infantryman still remains one of the most important military factors in the world. This power of the Russian soldier is explained by his extreme closeness to nature. There are simply no natural obstacles for him: in an impassable forest, swamps and swamps, in a roadless steppe - everywhere he feels at home. It crosses wide rivers on the most elemental means at hand, it can pave roads everywhere. In a few days the Russians build many kilometers of gati across impassable swamps; in winter, columns of one hundred rows of ten people each are sent into the forest with deep snow cover; in half an hour, a new thousand comes to replace these people, and in a few hours on the terrain that we have in the West would be considered impassable, a trodden road appears. An unlimited number of soldiers allows the transfer of heavy guns and other military equipment to any terrain without any vehicles.

In addition, the technical equipment of Russian troops meets their needs. Cars have a minimum weight, and their dimensions are minimized. Horses in the Russian army are hardy and do not require much care. Russians do not need to carry with them the huge reserves that fetter the actions of the troops in all Western armies.

Russian infantry has good weapons, especially many anti-tank weapons: sometimes you think that every infantryman has an anti-tank rifle or anti-tank gun. Russian very skillfully dispose of these funds, and it seems there is no place where they are not. In addition, the Russian anti-tank gun with its flat trajectory and great accuracy of shooting is convenient for any kind of combat.

Interestingly, the Russian infantry soldier is not distinguished by inquisitiveness, and therefore his intelligence usually does not give good results. Possessing the natural qualities of a scout, he makes little use of his abilities. Perhaps the reason lies in his aversion to independent action and in the inability to generalize and report in an understandable form the results of his observations.
Russian artillery, like infantry, is also used massively. As a rule, artillery preparation preceded the attacks of the Russian infantry, but the Russians did not attach great importance to short and sudden fire attacks. They had guns and shells, and they loved to spend these shells. In case of large offensive, the Russians usually had 200 trunks for each kilometer of the front. Sometimes, in special cases, this number increased to 300, but there was never less than 150. Artillery preparation usually lasted two hours, and during this time Russian artillerymen spent a daily or a half-day rate of ammunition.

Such a concentrated fire quickly destroyed the German positions that did not have great depth. No matter how carefully covered machine guns, mortars and especially anti-tank guns, they were soon destroyed by the enemy. Following this, the dense mass of infantry and tanks broke into the destroyed German positions. In the presence of mobile reserves, it was relatively easy to restore the situation, but, as a rule, we did not have such reserves. Thus, the brunt of the battle fell on the shoulders of the surviving soldiers at the forefront.

Russian artillery also destroyed headquarters and command posts in the depths of the defense. According to the intensity of artillery fire, it was often difficult to determine the direction of the main attack of the Russians, since the shelling was carried out with equal force along the whole front. However, the Russian artillery had shortcomings. For example, the inflexibility of fire plans was sometimes just astounding. The interaction of artillery with infantry and tanks was not well organized. The guns moved forward too slowly and often even remained in their original firing positions, as a result of which the advancing infantry, which advanced far into the defense, did not have artillery support for a long time.

Therefore, the desire of the German command to persistently hold the flanks with large incursions and breakthroughs of the Russians was a serious mistake, which was often fatal for the defenders. Usually our troops received orders to hold these flanks at any cost so that hastily tightened reserves could counterattack right into the flank of the Russians who had broken through and cut them off at the base of the wedge. It is clear that the reserves, which are concentrated on the flanks of the enemy’s breakthrough, came under the blow of all Russian artillery and after a while could no longer conduct any hostilities. Thus, the lack of maneuverability of the Russian artillery due to vicious German tactics turned into an advantage. Flank strikes against the Russian wedge should have been chosen deeper in the rear and beyond the reach of the Russian artillery. Instead of conducting bloody battles on the flanks, it was necessary to withdraw troops from them. Sometimes this was successfully carried out, despite orders from above, which required firmly holding the flanks; in such cases it was possible to stop the Russian infantry and tank units that were attacking without artillery support and create a new defensive line. The Russians were forced to develop a new fire plan and look for new positions for their artillery, which allowed the defenders to gain time.

The best means against the massive use of Russian artillery is an immediate counter-battery fight, and the consumption of ammunition should not be limited. It took a lot of time for the Russians to deploy a huge amount of artillery and to create large stocks of ammunition, in some cases it took several weeks. Despite the enemy’s excellent camouflage, we were usually able to detect Russian preparations for the offensive and monitor its development thanks to our aerial reconnaissance and aerial photography. Every night the Russians have more and more firing positions. They are empty for several days, and then one fine morning you find artillery on some of them, and about two nights before the start of the planned offensive, all the guns will be installed in their positions. In those very few cases when we had enough artillery and ammunition, we achieved excellent results with systematic counter-battery fire, which began at the very moment when the Russians were deploying their artillery. Air strikes also proved to be an effective means; sometimes ours aviation even managed to completely disrupt the deployment of Russian artillery.

During the war, the Russians improved and developed artillery tactics in the offensive. Their artillery preparation turned into a real squall of destructive fire. In particular, they used a cease-fire in very narrow areas, sometimes no more than a hundred meters wide, firing on the rest of the front with the same intensity. This gave the impression that the artillery preparation was still going on everywhere, whereas in reality the enemy infantry was already conducting their attack, moving along this narrow corridor.

Despite the known shortcomings, the Russian artillery is a very formidable branch of the military and fully deserves the appreciation that Stalin gave it. During the war, the Red Army used more heavy guns than the army of any other belligerent country.
Now I will focus on the Russian tank forces, which entered the war, having a great advantage - they had a T-34 tank, far superior to any type of German tanks. The Klim Voroshilov heavy tanks operating on the front in 1942 should not be underestimated either. Then the Russians upgraded the T-34 tank and, finally, in 1944, they built the massive tank "Joseph Stalin", which caused much trouble to our "tigers". Russian tank designers knew their business well. They focused all their attention on the main thing: the power of the tank gun, armor protection and maneuverability. During the war, their suspension system was much better than in the German tanks and in the tanks of other Western powers.

In 1941 and 1942, the tactical use of tanks by the Russians was not flexible, and the units of the tank forces were scattered across a huge front. In the summer of 1942, the Russian command, taking into account the experience of the battles, began to create whole tank armies with tank and mechanized corps. The task of the tank corps, in which there were relatively few motorized infantry and artillery, was to assist the infantry divisions that carried out the breakthrough. Mechanized corps were to develop a breakthrough in depth and pursue the enemy. Based on the nature of the tasks performed, the mechanized corps had an equal number of tanks with the tank corps, but there were no heavy machine types in them. In addition, in their organization they had a large number of motorized infantry, artillery and engineering troops. The success of the Russian armored forces is associated with this reorganization; By 1944, they became the most formidable offensive weapon of the second world war.

First, the Russian tank armies had to pay dearly for the lack of combat experience. Especially poor understanding of the methods of conducting tank battles and lack of ability to show junior and middle commanders. They lacked courage, tactical foresight, the ability to make quick decisions. The first operations of tank armies ended in complete failure. Dense masses of tanks were concentrated in front of the German defense, in their movement felt uncertainty and the absence of any plan. They interfered with each other, ran into our anti-tank guns, and in the event of a breakthrough, our positions stopped advancing and stopped, instead of developing success. These days, individual German anti-tank guns and 88-mm guns acted most efficiently: sometimes one gun damaged and incapacitated more than 30 tanks in one hour. It seemed to us that the Russians had created a tool that they would never learn to own, but already in the winter of 1942 / 43, the first signs of improvement appeared in their tactics.

1943 was the year for the Russian armored forces still a period of study. The heavy defeats suffered by the German army on the Eastern Front were explained not by the best tactical leadership of the Russians, but by the serious strategic mistakes of the German high command and the significant superiority of the enemy in the number of troops and equipment. Only in 1944, did large Russian tank and mechanized units acquire high mobility and power and became a very formidable weapon in the hands of courageous and capable commanders. Even junior officers have changed and have now shown great skill, determination and initiative. The defeat of our army group "Center" and the swift attack of Marshal Rotmistrov’s tanks from the Dnieper to the Vistula marked a new stage in stories The Red Army was a formidable warning to the West. Later, in the large-scale offensive of the Russian troops in January 1945, we also had to observe the swift and decisive actions of the Russian tanks.

The extraordinary development of Russian armored forces deserves the closest attention from those who study the experience of war. No one doubts that Russia can have its own Seydlitz, Murat or Rommel - in 1941-1945, the Russians certainly had such great commanders. However, it is not only the skillful leadership of certain gifted individuals; for the most part, people who were apathetic and ignorant, without any preparation, without any abilities, acted wisely and showed amazing composure. The tankers of the Red Army were tempered in the crucible of war, their skill grew immeasurably. Such a transformation should have required exceptionally high organization and unusually skillful planning and leadership. Similar changes can occur in other types of armed forces, such as aviation or underwater navywhose further progress is strongly encouraged by the Russian high command.

From the time of Peter the Great until the 1917 revolution, the royal armies were numerous, cumbersome and cumbersome. During the Finnish campaign and during the 1941-1942 operations, the same could be said about the Red Army. With the development of Russian armored forces, the overall picture has changed completely. At present, any real European defense plan must proceed from the fact that the air and tank armies of the Soviet Union can rush at us with such speed and fury in front of which all the operations of the Blitzkrieg of the Second World War will fade.

4. Army without a wagon

For the Russians, it is characteristic that their tank divisions have much less motor transport than the tank formations of the Western powers. It would be wrong to explain this by the insufficient production of automobiles in the USSR, since even rifle divisions with a horse-drawn carriage have a small number of horses and carts. In addition, in terms of their numbers, any rifle regiment or division of the Russians is significantly inferior to the corresponding military units of the Western armies. However, the total strength of the combat units of any Russian unit is about the same as in the West, because the Russians have far fewer people in the rear units.

In the Red Army, the rear bodies do not have to worry about providing military units with uniforms, tents, blankets and other items that are so necessary for soldiers of the armies of the West. During the offensive, they can afford to forget about the supply of troops, even with food, as the troops are "on the grass." The main task of the supply parts is reduced to the delivery of fuel and ammunition, but even in this case, combat vehicles are often used for transportation. In a Russian motorized division, a soldier does not have any other “baggage” besides the one he has with him, and he manages to move around in cars, perched on crates of ammunition or barrels of fuel.

This lack of vehicles leads to important consequences of a tactical and psychological order. Since the number of cars in the motorized division of the Russian is much less than in the same units of the Western armies, the Russian division is more mobile. Such a division is easier to manage, easier to mask and transport by rail.
Represents the interest and psychological side of things. Any soldiers of the armies of the West. one way or another connected with the logistics services. They provide him with a livelihood and provide some amenities, which brightens his hard life. When the units are “cool”, the surviving soldiers usually gather at the camp kitchens or in the wagon train, where they are trying to find shelter and consolation. A completely different position in the Russian army. The Russian soldier has nothing but a weapon, and the rear does not attract him. There are no camp kitchens or clothing wagons. If a soldier loses his gun, tank, or machine gun, he thereby loses his sole refuge; if he goes to the rear, he is detained, and sooner or later he finds himself again at the front.
So a small number of full-time vehicles gives Russians an important advantage. The Russian High Command is well aware of the mindset of the Russian soldier and manages to exploit the shortcomings of the latter so that they become his forte.

5. Russian reaction to the bombing

Experience shows that a Russian soldier has an almost incredible ability to withstand the strongest artillery fire and powerful air strikes; At the same time, the Russian command does not pay any attention to the huge losses from the bombing and the artillery fire, and it steadily follows the previously planned plans. The insensitivity of the Russians to even the strongest shelling was again confirmed during Operation Citadel. It is possible that this is to some extent due to the following reasons.

The stoicism of the majority of Russian soldiers and their slow reaction make them almost insensitive to losses. Russian soldiers value their lives no more than the lives of their comrades. Neither bombs exploding nor projectiles blasts it.

Naturally, among Russian soldiers there are people who possess a more sensitive kind, but they are accustomed to carry out orders precisely and without the slightest hesitation. In the Russian army there is an iron discipline - unquestioning obedience has become a characteristic feature of the Russian military system.
The Russian insensitivity to artillery fire is not some kind of new quality - it manifested itself even during the First World War. We find an indication of this in Kolenkur in his description of the Battle of Borodino 1812 of the year. He says that "the enemy, who was under pressure from all sides, gathered his troops and steadfastly held, despite the enormous losses from artillery fire." He further writes that it was completely incomprehensible why so few prisoners were taken on captured redoubts and positions that the Russians defended with such stubbornness. In this regard, Kolenkur brings the following remark of the emperor: "These Russians do not surrender alive. We cannot do anything about it."

As for the Russian military leaders, it is well known that: a) they almost in any situation and in any case strictly and unswervingly adhere to orders or earlier decisions, are not considered with changes in the situation, the response of the enemy and the loss of their own troops. Naturally, there are many negative points in this, but at the same time there are well-known positive aspects; b) they had at their disposal almost inexhaustible reserves of manpower to compensate for the losses. Russian command can go to great sacrifices and therefore does not stop in front of them.

In preparation for the operation, it is necessary to take into account the reaction or, rather, the lack of reaction of the Russian troops and their command. Interaction over time, the assessment of possible success and the amount of military equipment required largely depend on this factor. It should, however, be pointed out that there were cases when Russian formations hardened in battle panicked and showed nervousness with a relatively small shelling. But such cases were very rare, so it would be a blunder to rely on them. It is much more useful to overestimate the perseverance of the Russians and you can never count on the fact that they will not survive.
Originator:
http://www.csef.ru
87 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. sichevik
    sichevik 23 March 2013 09: 33 New
    13
    Always a Russian soldier was a cut above his enemies. Always beat enemies, beats, and will beat.
    1. Gazprom
      Gazprom 23 March 2013 10: 01 New
      +5
      Not always beaten.
      In the history of Russia there are also wars lost for various reasons, lost battles
      Crimean, RYAV, episodes of shameful flight in 41m
      This is normal, we are all people, but in general, yes, worthy soldiers who have won both the Germans and the same Japanese
      1. nnz226
        nnz226 23 March 2013 14: 52 New
        34
        Well, the Crimean War, and even lost, is a big question. Yes, they LEFT Sevastopol, so with a 5-fold superiority in people, almost a 10-fold superiority in artillery and especially in ammunition, having longer-range fittings, against the massive smooth-bore guns of the Russians, to hang around for 349 days under the city walls ?! This is not a victory. If the balance of forces were the other way around, and the Russians would have had to take Sevastopol, where the "enlightened" Gay Europeans were sitting, I think the topic would have been closed in three days !!! By the way, the example of the second defense of Sevastopol and its capture in 1944 confirms this. And the Crimean War was fought not only near Sevastopol. 2 companies of soldiers + militias under the command of Admiral Zavoiko, slapped the Anglo-French troops in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, with again the numerical and weapon advantage of the Gay Europeans, given that the "vaunted" British marines landed there. On the White Sea, the monks of the Solovetsky Monastery + a disabled team (then this meant a team of veteran soldiers) with cannons of the Boris Godunov model repulsed the assault of the same British Marines and they knocked down indefatigably.
        The Russo-Japanese War was wasted, but then the systemic crisis of the autocracy worked, but this war made such an impression on the "gentle samurai souls" that in 1941, in a squadron that was going to finish Pearl Harbor, the pilots sang "The Ballad of a Warrior Who Sacrifices itself "created in MEMORY OF THE KILLED IN RUSSIAN BAYONET COUNTER-ATTACKS UNDER PORT-ARTHUR !!! How! Again, 40 years later, Russia, not rotten, rolled the entire Kwantung Army of the Japanese into a thin leaf in a week! And in 1941 they ran for everything, and in 1945 they broke away for the "boilers", and for tank breakthroughs, and for flight. One Vistula-Oder operation is worth something. Purley to the west at a pace that no one has ever blocked or will block (maybe, of course, God forbid, we will clash with NATO, that is, there is a chance to move westward faster)
        1. sergeant1973
          sergeant1973 24 March 2013 17: 58 New
          +4
          peasants Russian soldiers the standard of martial art and courage !!!!! Thanks to our grandfathers for the victory !!!!!!!!!
        2. sergius60
          sergius60 24 March 2013 19: 09 New
          +2
          I absolutely agree with you. But there are some simple clarifications. The Crimean War is almost a World War. Who Wasn't There? USA? In the middle of the century - about zero value. Germany? Another 2 decades BEFORE creation. China and Japan? Not even funny then. Austria-Hungary was in a "fighting stance". And against this "Caudla" - ONE Russia.
          Russian-Japanese War. I tried to delve into the topic on purpose. Unmeasurable amount of "accidents" !!! "Leaked" war for "loot". The first Chechen is a complete analogue.
        3. aviator46
          aviator46 25 March 2013 01: 13 New
          -4
          The Kwantung Army is a rear, convoy Army.
          And resistance was rendered by those units that did not receive the Emperor’s Decree on Surrender.
          They rolled back to the East, lost millions of lives of the military and civilians, and attacked, ineptly ruined millions more.
          This is Pirov’s victory ..
          1. Firstvanguard
            Firstvanguard 25 March 2013 03: 59 New
            +2
            Ek, you turned down, dear, about millions belay
            Teach history not from Amer’s textbooks, you’ll learn a lot of new things bully
        4. vyatom
          vyatom 25 March 2013 15: 32 New
          +1
          Nobody likes losers. And especially not interested in why they are such clowns. Therefore, I do not read the memories of battered German generals. And it’s not for them to judge a Russian soldier who weighed them with a star at all times.
      2. Grishka100watt
        Grishka100watt 23 March 2013 23: 06 New
        +3
        And I heard that the Red Army at 41m on the western fronts had a strength of 2,5 million against 5 million of the German army. So about the shameful flight, I would not become so excited ..
        1. smile
          smile 24 March 2013 06: 10 New
          +7
          Grishka100watt In
          The dispersed Red Army met a concentrated Wehrmacht with comrades ... in the areas of the main strikes of the Germans, up to 12 times superiority ... infantry ... in terms of mob resources, they and our allies did not exceed us multiple ... but, considering. that 400 millionth Europe worked for them (Czechoslovakia, for example, was the leading exporter of the world's arms and military equipment) .... in December 41 we inflicted losses on the Germans in excess of their losses on the capture of 35 million Poland, France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Greece, Yugoslavia ... the losses of the Germans during the capture of these countries were on average 1 to 17 .... irretrievable losses in December, 41 of them were about 120. we have, about 140 thousand ... so far more ... that do it. it’s hard to beat the strongest military machine in the world, like trampling the most powerful armies of Europe ... ... but we fully paid off later ... but you heard correctly, but ours are bigger, and the Germans are with allies ... and in general the axis armies with allies at that time, about 10 million ... :)))
          and the population of the British Empire is over 550 million,
          French, 107 million ... I mean, trying to get a Russian, there were from 170 to 180 mtls ... we would have looked at ourselves ..
          and further. even the tiny Luxembourg gave the Wehrmacht 13 soldiers-000 we captured ... this is the contribution of Europe ....
          1. Grishka100watt
            Grishka100watt 24 March 2013 16: 05 New
            +2
            So I am the same) Another minus is some kind of europets put me)
          2. Azzzwer
            Azzzwer 24 March 2013 20: 01 New
            +3
            Quote: smile
            and further. even the tiny Luxembourg gave the Wehrmacht 13 000 soldiers-1500 we captured ... this is the contribution of Europe.

            Well what can I say? Well p ... s they!
      3. admiral993
        admiral993 30 March 2013 14: 37 New
        0
        the generals were losing (descriptions of their actions are given and confirm my words), but the Russian soldier always won in a duel. Whole and private. Unfortunately, the whole nullifies and brings down everything particular, from here and the confirmation of your words.
    2. Dmitry_2013
      Dmitry_2013 26 March 2013 10: 32 New
      0
      And we, that is, the current generation, need to maintain this status, since
      will beat

      directly depends only on us and our children. smile
  2. Sirocco
    Sirocco 23 March 2013 10: 14 New
    +9
    There is a legend that in the first year of the war, General Moroz helped the Russians, but do not you think gentlemen? that the soldiers of the Red Army are the same people as the soldiers of the Wehrmacht? They also froze, they also fought, they also loved. BUT, nevertheless, Hitler did not succeed in a victorious march in Russia as in Europe. And why? laughing
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic 23 March 2013 12: 49 New
      10
      Quote: Sirocco
      There is a legend that in the first year of the war, General Moroz helped the Russians, but do not you think gentlemen? that the soldiers of the Red Army are the same people as the soldiers of the Wehrmacht? They also froze, they also fought, they also loved. BUT, nevertheless, Hitler did not succeed in a victorious march in Russia as in Europe. And why?


      Russian remains a good soldier everywhere and in any conditions...
      The field kitchen, almost a shrine in the eyes of soldiers of other armies, is just a pleasant surprise for the Russians and they can do without it for days and weeks. The Russian soldier is quite satisfied with a handful of millet or rice, adding to them what nature gives him. Such proximity to nature explains the ability of the Russian to become, as it were, part of the earth, literally dissolve in it. A soldier of the Russian army is an unsurpassed master of camouflage and self-digging, as well as field fortification ...
      The strength of the Russian soldier is explained by his extreme proximity to nature. For him, there simply are no natural obstacles: in an impassable forest, swamps and marshes, in an impassable steppe, he feels at home everywhere. He crosses wide rivers on the most basic means at hand, he can pave roads everywhere. In a few days, the Russians build multi-kilometer gati through impassable swamps.

      / General von Mellentin /

      If we recall that Frederick the Great opposed the enemy, who possessed twelvefold superiority in strength, then you seem to yourself just a bolt. This time we ourselves have the superiority in power! Well, isn't that a shame?
      / Hitler (record from 28.1 1942 g) /
      1. Yarbay
        Yarbay 23 March 2013 13: 09 New
        +5
        Quote: Ascetic
        If we recall that Frederick the Great opposed the enemy, who possessed twelvefold superiority in strength, then you seem to yourself just a bolt. This time we ourselves have the superiority in power! Well, isn't that a shame?
        / Hitler (entry from 28.1 1942 g)
        /


        Of course a shame !!!
        1. Ascetic
          Ascetic 23 March 2013 16: 26 New
          +3
          Alibek, the rightmost soldier (or officer) in the photo in a leather jacket from the Caucasus is probably, in my opinion similar to your fellow countryman, what do you think?
          1. Yarbay
            Yarbay 23 March 2013 16: 51 New
            +6
            Quote: Ascetic
            the rightmost soldier (or officer) in the photo in a leather jacket from the Caucasus probably, I think it looks like your fellow countryman, what do you think?

            Maybe!!
            but the faces of all are very dear to me !!
            I am very thankful to them all and proud of them !!
            Heydar must show, he is an expert !!
            I even found all the data of my relative with extracts from orders on awards !!
            He walks through photographs according to the ugly descriptions in books!
          2. vyatom
            vyatom 25 March 2013 15: 34 New
            0
            Quote: Ascetic
            Alibek, the rightmost soldier (or officer) in the photo in a leather jacket from the Caucasus is probably, in my opinion similar to your fellow countryman, what do you think?

            I think the Tatar on the right is likely.
            1. klimpopov
              klimpopov 25 March 2013 16: 41 New
              +1
              No, not a Tatar. All the same from the Caucasus. But the point is not that, but that he is a WINNER! And the USSR is the winner and they, as they say, are not judged, but that the experience acquired at such a great price and we treat our history so disdainfully is bad. Although maybe this is our trait - "then overcoming and struggling to beat the enemy" - I don't remember who said ...
      2. Sirocco
        Sirocco 23 March 2013 14: 12 New
        17
        Quote: Ascetic
        The field kitchen, almost a shrine in the eyes of soldiers of other armies, is just a pleasant surprise for the Russians

        Do not carry large convoys, the main thing is speed and onslaught, your bread in the wagon train and backpacks of enemies. (A.V. Suvorov) soldier
        1. Normal
          Normal 23 March 2013 15: 05 New
          +7
          Quote: Sirocco
          your bread in the wagon train and satchels of enemies. (A.V. Suvorov)

          Guys! There are wine and women in the fortress! - Hooray !!! (Menshikov. F / f Peter - I)
          Also a tactical trick laughing
          1. Nagaibak
            Nagaibak 24 March 2013 08: 37 New
            +2
            Normal "Guys! There is wine and women in the fortress! - Hurray-ah-ah !!! (Menshikov .k / f Peter - I) Also a tactical technique"
            Remember, a mysterious tactical device!
            When we retreat, this is what we are going forward !!!
            I.Rasteryaev
            Inspired your commentary from a song ...
            1. klimpopov
              klimpopov 25 March 2013 16: 43 New
              0
              While the enemy is drawing offensive maps, we change landscapes, moreover, manually

              It also inspired ...
    2. Setrac
      Setrac 23 March 2013 20: 36 New
      +1
      General Moroz saved the Germans in 41 from the final defeat, having lost from 60 to 80% of the personnel in combat units, the Wehrmacht could not continue fighting, by spring the number of troops was restored, but this did not help the Germans.
      1. skeptic
        skeptic 24 March 2013 13: 25 New
        +1
        Quote: Setrac
        General Moroz saved the Germans in 41 from the final defeat, having lost from 60 to 80% of the personnel in combat units, the Wehrmacht could not continue fighting, by spring the number of troops was restored, but this did not help the Germans.


        The skillful and persistent work of the Communists has led to the fact that since 1917, Russia has changed in the most amazing way. There can be no doubt that the Russian is increasingly developing the skill of independent actions, and his level of education is constantly growing. It is possible that over a long period of preparation in a peaceful environment, he will develop a personal initiative.
        Military leaders will certainly contribute in every way to this evolution. The Russian high command knows its job better than the command of any other army.


        This person cannot be accused of "urapatriotism" towards the USSR. Only one thing remained unchanged for the losing opponents - General Moroz, General Zhara, and other weather command.

        Until the very end of the war, the Russians, not paying attention to the enormous losses, threw infantry into the attack in almost closed formations. Due to the superiority in numbers, this method has made it possible to achieve many major successes.

        Russian genuine masters of seepage - a form of hostilities in which they have no equal. I also drew attention to their persistent desire to create bridgeheads or any other forward positions. I must emphasize that if you even reconcile for some time with the Russian capture of the bridgehead, this can lead to fatal consequences.


        Even the enemy cannot decide, so who is he - a Russian soldier?
    3. Krilion
      Krilion 24 March 2013 02: 49 New
      0
      Quote: Sirocco
      There is a legend that in the first year of the war, General Moroz helped the Russians, but do not you think gentlemen? that the soldiers of the Red Army are the same people as the soldiers of the Wehrmacht? They also froze, they also fought,


      It seems to the Germans it was somewhat worse - they stupidly didn’t have zine clothes ... they thought that they would end the war before winter ...
      1. smile
        smile 24 March 2013 12: 32 New
        +2
        Krilion
        Your profile picture, revive it, you would be nailed. Read Halder, in October they were waiting for frosts to freeze the ground ... how happy they were, that the frosts came .... Even then the Germans realized, they would winter ... were preparing
        And anyway ... I live in Kaliningrad, East Prussia .. in November, frosts of 15 degrees are not uncommon, in winter there are also 25 and 30 ... It is not clear, In my Vaterland, did the Wehrmacht freeze for the winter? Or did they think we were warmer than theirs? :)))) Agree, a strange thing ... :))))
        1. shifervals
          shifervals 25 March 2013 11: 59 New
          0
          The fact that the Wehrmacht was preparing for the winter campaign is a medical fact. The question is how I prepared. It is unlikely that 70 years ago the term "logistics" was in use, but it was logistics that let them down. She was focused on ensuring the life of an individual soldier, and not on continuous support of the battle. There is a book by Robert Kershaw "41 years through the eyes of the Germans." The author is not noticed in Russophilia, and the primary sources do not suffer from this, but the conclusion from the book is the same: the Germans catastrophically underestimated (the combat, technical, industrial and moral-psychological potential) of the enemy, i.e. us fool The text of the passage under discussion directly reflects the mood and assessment of the Russians by the Germans, which then prevailed: barbarians, ignoramuses, a thoughtless herd, etc., but the rear of these damned Russians is imprisoned precisely to ensure combat, and not comfort, and moreover it is mobile and efficient in satisfying troops' requests.

          Although it can be said that the author, taking into account his Teutonic origin, is objective. 13 ... 14 years ago, I got some life experience that is consistent with the conclusions of von Mellentin. The operating units primarily demanded ammunition, water and fuel. The rest is secondary, but this does not mean that the soldiers were kept on a starvation ration, the rear still worked well. Ammunition in daily reports was considered plus / minus one million rounds of ammunition per day, the average daily consumption of artillery ammunition was in the region of 800 ... 850 rounds for 24 guns, this in the absence of intense fighting, several 1300 shells were spit out several times per day of battle. The infantry was screaming - give me more, but the thermal regime did not allow firing, otherwise the rod at the guns would be damaged. The approved standards for the consumption of ammunition were rarely recalled, more precisely - never, most importantly - a sea of ​​fire. The Russian soldier is really resistant, persistent, savvy, unpretentious and able to perform any task - this is the best soldier in the world. But something did not notice cattle and lack of initiative
    4. smile
      smile 24 March 2013 06: 31 New
      +5
      Sirocco
      It does not seem
      Russians wash themselves with liquid oxygen, their general Dead Frost aptly throws corpses — about 300 frost-resistant Bolsheviks at one good German, moreover, there are also generals who are thirsty. the heat, rain, I'm afraid of the Russians and oh, tired of sculpting ... and these scoundrels, together with billions of T-34s, under the strict guidance of 50 million commissars, prevented these wild Russians from civilizing ... tragedy, in short ... all pi .. .sy world mourn ....
      1. Marek Rozny
        Marek Rozny 24 March 2013 11: 05 New
        +1
        Smile, in addition to all this, the Soviet army had another dishonest prodigy, about which all the losing German generals write - the Mongols, inspired by Jewish political instructors. If Hitler would also have had the Mongols with Commissar Rabinovich, then wow, how would they pile up the Red Army!
        1. smile
          smile 24 March 2013 12: 14 New
          +1
          Marek Rozny (5
          In-in. even with Halder I read about the Mongols from the personal guard regiment Stalinal near Moscow. :))))))
          1. Marek Rozny
            Marek Rozny 24 March 2013 17: 21 New
            +3
            they insidiously attacked the Germans and shattered them. and that was dishonest, because all the Red Army men had to surrender. vile and low reception of "Stalin's personal guards".

            This was not an event near Moscow, but in July 1941. generally Abydna Halder.
    5. Trapperxnumx
      Trapperxnumx 26 March 2013 14: 58 New
      0
      Quote: Sirocco
      There is a legend that in the first year of the war, General Moroz helped the Russians, but do not you think gentlemen? that the soldiers of the Red Army are the same people as the soldiers of the Wehrmacht? They also froze, they also fought, they also loved. BUT, nevertheless, Hitler did not succeed in a victorious march in Russia as in Europe. And why? laughing


      Yeah. This excuse of all German generals always amused. According to the plan of the USSR, they planned to defeat it during the 3 months, that is, until the end of September. And the frost prevented this in November and December))))
  3. Phantom Revolution
    Phantom Revolution 23 March 2013 10: 21 New
    +3
    That's about the losses, it’s not true, when my grandfather was the commander of a regiment of hunters in Finnish, then everyone valued the lives of their partners and their own.
  4. marsel1524
    marsel1524 23 March 2013 10: 31 New
    11
    Trying to generalize not generalizable? To justify the defeat of the "right" German army and the right Western soldier, before the wrong Russians ...
    1. Stas57
      Stas57 23 March 2013 10: 37 New
      +6
      an attempt to justify their mistakes, blaming everything on Hitler, Russian frost, dumb / smart Russians, super tanks, all these memoirs are about the same.
      It would be better if he shot himself chtol ...
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 23 March 2013 11: 33 New
        11
        Quote: Stas57
        all of these memoirs are about the same.

        No, not all. I read many memoirs of German generals and the recollections of ordinary soldiers; against their background, Mellentin is one of the most sane, although, of course, it cannot do without some cliches or outright blunders. You should read Guderian, really there, the Germans are the best, the Russians are stupid and suddenly the figs are already retreating, the conclusion: Hitler is to blame, Russian frosts and dirt. smile
        1. rate
          rate 23 March 2013 13: 19 New
          +3
          Quote: Vladimirets

          the Germans are the best, the Russians are stupid and suddenly the figs are already retreating, the conclusion: Hitler is to blame, Russian frosts and dirt. smile

          A vivid illustration of the complacency of the Germans. They never learned anything, not even from their Hitler. Underestimation means the impending new defeat. Let them read their fathers hi
        2. Stas57
          Stas57 23 March 2013 13: 21 New
          +1
          No, not all.

          everything see below

          I read many memoirs of German generals and the recollections of ordinary soldiers; against their background, Mellentin is one of the most sane, although, of course, it cannot do without some cliches or outright blunders. You should read Guderian, really there, the Germans are the best, the Russians are stupid and suddenly the figs are already retreating, the conclusion: Hitler is to blame, Russian frosts and dirt.

          it memoirs, this kind of literature, where someone describes his coolness in a historical context, usually at the same time omitting his mistakes, or finding excuse for them.
          Normal human reaction.
          Moreover, the loser side, as I said above, is looking for, extreme, general frost, super tanks, etc. in the causes of their failures and defeat,. Everything, to one degree or another, Well, it’s more, someone is less, but there is only one tendency, with its own losing characteristics, with an eye on the winner. .
          The victorious side is softer, it does not need to make excuses, cry, blame the environment, but also suffers from the same diligent circumvention of its failures.
          Very rarely does anyone write, "here I messed up, sent someone and he died, just like that, because of my mistake", very rarely.
          ps. Well, Heitz cries louder, yes, and Mellentin is much less, well, the essence is the same and the justification is about the same, IMHO ...
        3. Zynaps
          Zynaps 23 March 2013 17: 26 New
          +5
          of Goth still have suitable memoirs. and the actions of the armored forces are perfectly spelled out. others, with the exception of Mellentin, are entirely with swollen ChSV.

          in general, there is an old button accordion that all military memoirs are divided into three groups:

          1. general of the winning side: "How I won the war."
          2. General of the battered side: "How I was not allowed to win the war."
          3. soldier's memoirs: "And you all went to ..."
        4. Hudo
          Hudo 24 March 2013 20: 24 New
          0
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Mellentin is one of the most sane, although it also, of course, cannot do without some cliches or outright blunders.


          Mellenthin, just an example of "sanity"! Excuse me, where did you find this sanity in his memoirs?
          His (Mellentin) memoirs, just a mixture of boasting about yourself beloved, interspersed with boasting and frank ch_m_o_k lower than your back to General Bulk. And all this rubbish is superimposed on a number of historical events presented to the reader in a very perverse form.
          1. maxvet
            maxvet 26 March 2013 11: 00 New
            0
            I agree, but they retreated only because the neighbors pumped up and retreated first, and he and Balck (Balk) laid breakwaters from Russian corpses, mountains of Russian technology
  5. bistrov.
    bistrov. 23 March 2013 10: 56 New
    18
    A lot of demagoguery, of course, but it was interesting to read the revelations of the fascist general. It amused that he considers all of us primitive people, they say we act on the level of instincts. He does not even hide the fact that the Second World War was not only a war between the USSR and Germany, but a war of the entire West against the USSR. At the same time, he admits that we have created more powerful artillery and improved tank forces. As for the combat losses, they are practically equal for the USSR and Germany, but it must be borne in mind that the armed forces and expeditionary corps of many European countries fought on the side of the Germans, for some reason their losses are not taken into account. In this case, he ascribes to our military command that it possessed innumerable reserves, and of course the USSR exceeded Germany in population (about 190 million USSR and about 80 Germany), but after all Germany used the resources of all of Europe, including human resources, and after all Europe was far ahead of the USSR. In addition, it should be noted that Nazi Germany put under arms and forced to fight on its side and Vlasov, and Bandera, and Baltic, and all kinds of "eastern" battalions. And nevertheless, the united aggressive forces of Europe led by fascist Germany, I think it would be more correct, those who fought against the USSR lost the war. And also, mind you, he does not exclude the outbreak of a new war, but even assumes it. Here is a fascist bastard!
    1. I think so
      I think so 23 March 2013 15: 18 New
      +7
      "... Here is a fascist bastard! ..."
      Here it is more correct to say - "Here is a Western bastard!" We are now convinced that the fascist ideology does NOT differ from the WESTERN in ANYTHING. We are ETERNAL enemies and subhumans for them. We HINDER them. Therefore, the more objective the ENEMIES 'assessments of our capabilities, the worse for us, albeit more pleasant.
      1. Civil
        Civil 23 March 2013 19: 27 New
        0
        already posted this article))
  6. AK-47
    AK-47 23 March 2013 10: 57 New
    +6
    Each Russian advance was preceded by seepage through the front line of small units and individual groups.

    In this kind of warfare, no one has yet surpassed the Russians. No matter how carefully surveillance was organized at the forefront, the Russians unexpectedly found themselves in the very center of our location, and no one ever knew how they managed to get there.
    Such seepage was usually carried out with the greatest art, almost silently and without a single shot. This tactic was used by the Russians hundreds of times and provided them with significant success.

    Mellentin Friedrich von Wilhelm, Major General of the Tank Forces.
    1. lechatormosis
      lechatormosis 23 March 2013 17: 22 New
      +2
      at the sight of this erysipelas, THE HAND REACHES FOR A GUN.
  7. LION
    LION 23 March 2013 10: 57 New
    +8
    I read his little book. On a shelf stands with Guderian. He is there to blame someone. And there are a lot of nasty things about the Red Army.
    1. Fox
      Fox 23 March 2013 11: 45 New
      0
      Quote: LION
      I read his little book. Guderian stands on a shelf

      they justify their pro ... e ... as they can. how they can. how many brains were enough. only Wilhelm Keitel truly described.
  8. Yura
    Yura 23 March 2013 11: 26 New
    +6
    And the bias in the article is felt, and even how. The advantage of the Russian soldier is that he is Russian! And the shortcomings of the Russian soldier, in the opinion of this short-sighted major general, turn out to be virtues. Only the author of these memoirs forgot to say that many of the shortcomings in the supply, sometimes in the decisions that were not quite right for the commanders, were compensated by the Russian soldier for his dedication. Only the author forgot to say that the main drawback of the opponents of the Russian soldier is that they do not have his flaws, that is, that they are not Russians, hence the envy. There were bits and there will be bits.
  9. Jokervx
    Jokervx 23 March 2013 11: 33 New
    +2
    "Mellenthin Friedrich von Wilhelm, Major General of the Tank Forces. On the Eastern Front, he was Chief of Staff of the 48th Panzer Corps, and then Chief of Staff of the 4th Panzer Army. He took part in the Stalingrad and Kursk battles. He is so smart, so competent, and the war ended in Berlin, excuses will not help to avoid shame, woe to the vanquished.
  10. Terminator
    Terminator 23 March 2013 11: 45 New
    0
    And where about aviation?
  11. Black
    Black 23 March 2013 12: 04 New
    +1
    There is a lot of truth in "little things", and behind this tinsel you can see German arrogance and an attempt to explain the "battered face" by unlimited reserves as the main factor in the strength of the Russians.
    1. Yarbay
      Yarbay 23 March 2013 12: 56 New
      +3
      Quote: Chen
      There is a lot of truth "little things", and behind this tinsel you can see German arrogance

      Well, not so and so on and about s
      were Germans !!
      Here in a blog at Heydar Mirza read, by the way, he does a great job finding and publishing the exploits of Soviet soldiers in
      IN!


      Army Rules, Document No. 300/1, Command of the German Ground Forces, 1941
      The war is an ART, FREE CREATIVE ACTIVITY, which is based on a SCIENTIFIC BASIS. She makes the highest demands on the character of the person.


      Military affairs is developing continuously. New means of warfare are constantly giving it new and changing forms. It is necessary to accurately predict the start time of using these forms, and correctly and timely evaluate their consequences.


      The variety of situations in a war is limitless. They often change and rarely when it is possible to foresee them in advance. Unpredictable factors are often critical. Individual will is confronted with the will of the adversary, which is beyond its control. Friction and mistakes are everyday occurrences.


      Instructions on the conduct of war cannot be fully stated in the form of rules. The principles proposed by these rules should be applied depending on the requirements of the situation. SIMPLE ACTION TAKEN PERFORMANCE CONSISTENTLY, is the most reliable means of achieving the desired result.


      For an individual, war is the hardest test of her mental and physical abilities to resist. Therefore, IN THE WAR OF QUALITY OF CHARACTER OUTSTAND MENTAL ABILITIES. Many individuals exhibit outstanding qualities on the battlefield, but they are not noticed in peacetime.


      The command of the armies and troops requires leaders with reasonableness, clear thinking and foresight, independent decision-making, persistent and energetic in their implementation, not too sensitive to the changing destinies of the war and with a distinct sense of the high responsibility assigned to them. The officer is, in all respects , leader and educator. In addition to the knowledge of his subordinates and a sense of justice, he should be distinguished by superior knowledge and experience, moral stability, self-control and courage.


      The example and personal behavior of the officer, as well as the soldiers used in officer positions, have a DEFINING INFLUENCE ON THE MILITARY. An officer who, in the face of the enemy, shows composure, courage and determination - carries the troops with him. But he must find a way to the hearts of his subordinates. He must win their trust by understanding their thoughts and feelings, as well as relentless pursuit of their well-being. Mutual trust is the surest foundation of discipline in times of danger and deprivation.
      1. Yarbay
        Yarbay 23 March 2013 12: 57 New
        +3
        Each leader, in all situations, should give himself completely, without fear of ACCEPTANCE OF RESPONSIBILITY, which belongs to him. The pleasure received from taking responsibility is the most noble quality of a leader. But this should not be sought by making arbitrary decisions without taking into account the situation as a whole, the requirement to follow orders to the smallest detail and to replace obedience with nit-picking in relation to subordinates. Independence should not become arbitrariness. On the other hand, autonomy, applied correctly and within reasonable limits, is the basis of major success. Despite the development of technology, the value of a person is a decisive factor; the conduct of the battle in loose order made it even more significant. The incompleteness of the battlefield requires such fighters who can THINK AND ACCEPT ON their own, use any situation carefully, decisively and boldly, being filled with the conviction that EVERYONE RESPONSES FOR SUCCESS. A trained habit of physical activity, self-respect, willpower, self-confidence and courage give a person the opportunity to master the most difficult situation.


        The value of the leader and the value of the subordinate determine the military value of the troops, which finds its completion as a weapon, its care and maintenance in a state of combat readiness. EXCELLENCE IN BATTLE VALUE CAN COMPENSATE THE LACK OF NUMBER OF TROOPS. The higher the combat value, the more opportunities appear for conducting effective and agile combat operations. Excellence in leadership and superiority in combat value are a solid foundation for victory.


        Leaders should LIVE THE LIFE OF THEIR FORCES and share with them their dangers and hardships, their joys and sorrows. ONLY THROUGH THEIR EXPERIENCE, they can come to a judgment on the combat value and the needs of their troops. Man is responsible not only for himself, but also for his comrades. Anyone who can do more, who is more capable, should guide and lead those who are weaker and have less experience. On such foundations, a sense of genuine camaraderie is growing, which plays an important role in relations between the manager and subordinates, as well as within the unit.


        A unit that was knocked together only superficially, and not by LONG-TERM WORK ON TRAINING AND PREPARATION, quickly fails at critical moments and under the pressure of unexpected events. Therefore, from the very beginning of the war, the need to strengthen and maintain the internal HARDNESS AND DISCIPLINE OF THE TROOPS, along with the need for their TRAINING, has always been regarded as crucial. Each leader is obliged to apply any measures, even the most severe ones, against weakening discipline, against acts of violence, robbery, panic and other harmful phenomena. Discipline is the cornerstone of the army, and its maintenance by strict measures is beneficial to all.

        The combat readiness of the troops must be maintained at a high level in order to meet the highest requirements at crucial moments. Anyone who unnecessarily exhausts troops undermines the foundations of success. The use of troops in hostilities must meet the desired goal. Impossible requirements harm the spirit of the troops and undermine their confidence in their leadership.


        From the youngest soldier and above, everywhere, people should be encouraged, by their consent, to exert all their mental, spiritual and physical forces. Only in this way will the full potential of the troops be revealed. Only then will people be nurtured who, even in danger, will remain courageous and decisive and will drag their weaker comrades into accomplishing feats. Thus, decisive action remains a paramount requirement in the war. Everyone, from the highest commander to the youngest soldier, must always be aware that omission and negligence will shoulder a greater burden than errors in choosing a weapon ..
        1. Yarbay
          Yarbay 23 March 2013 12: 59 New
          0
          very clever document!
          1. xan
            xan 23 March 2013 18: 25 New
            0
            Quote: Yarbay
            very clever document!

            the document is not stupid, but they lost the war
            the commander didn’t have time to put together a unit, and that’s all,
            if the peasants in the country are ram, no instructions will help to put together an army.
            and he wrote bullshit about the initiative of an individual soldier, recently there was an article about an armor-piercer, and about half a year ago about an artilleryman who, due to the lack of initiative, imposed on the Germans at their worst
  12. Bosk
    Bosk 23 March 2013 12: 17 New
    0
    This needs to be printed ... it’s nice to pack it and send it to the congressmen on May 9th, otherwise they’re planning and planning ... maybe after reading this they will accept some new amendments ... the cant was not received.
  13. Jokervx
    Jokervx 23 March 2013 12: 25 New
    +1
    They came to defeat us, they received lyuli from our fathers and grandfathers, they were also offended. Strange people. laughing
  14. MAG
    MAG 23 March 2013 12: 38 New
    0
    The problem of providing troops with food for the Russian command is of secondary importance, since the Russians actually do not need a centralized army supply. - Nothing has changed in March 2001 at the May Day outpost a soldier died from hunger, then they fed him a month for slaughter and then again hunger! At our Agishbatoy outpost, a loaf of black alcohol bread was divided by 3 per day, if you just lay there and didn’t move it was tolerable, but we dug trenches and climbed the mountains and slept for 3 hours a day !!! There were gunshots, 2 frames from hunger left the post at night in Shali, the Czechs wanted to go, they caught one head cut off and asked for a second ransom! but the battalion commander of the 3rd battalion went in NATO uniform and equipment, as they went on soldiers and go
  15. predator.3
    predator.3 23 March 2013 12: 53 New
    +3
    If you look through the stories of two world wars, then the real warrior-soldiers were: these are Russians, Germans and Serbs.
    1. Fox
      Fox 23 March 2013 14: 21 New
      0
      Quote: predator.3
      the real warrior soldiers were: these are Russians, Germans and Serbs.

      and add the Greeks ... also did not lie under the Germans.
  16. Kubanets
    Kubanets 23 March 2013 13: 29 New
    0
    Another nonsense in the style of Svanidze. The Russian Soviet Army fought and fought against the laws of Clausewitz. Another mentality
  17. Army1
    Army1 23 March 2013 13: 33 New
    +2
    This is all good, but you also need to think about people, it’s better to spend a rocket than to kill a soldier (-a-). It is a pity that the command thinks differently.
  18. Avenger711
    Avenger711 23 March 2013 13: 54 New
    0
    What amusing excuses that German generals see few soldiers, and even those are not the same, or the case is Russian, for which there is nothing for anything.
  19. svp67
    svp67 23 March 2013 13: 59 New
    +1
    The art of the commander lies in the fact that to maximize the strengths of his army and the weaknesses of a stranger ...
  20. AlexMH
    AlexMH 23 March 2013 14: 28 New
    16
    http://armor.kiev.ua/humor/txt/ger.php - взято отсюда

    According to the memoirs of Guderian, Middeldorf, Mellenthin, Manstein and Tippelskirch

    1) Hitler disturbed us. Hitler was **** The German soldier was rulez. The German commander was like Great Frederick, but without vicious inclinations.

    2) Russians overwhelmed us with meat. The Russians had a lot of meat. The Russian soldier is a child of nature, he eats what he cannot run away from him, sleeps standing up, like a horse, and knows how to leak. The author has repeatedly witnessed how entire Russian tank armies were leaking through the front line, and nothing betrayed their presence - it would seem that yesterday, the usual artillery preparation, bombing, the Russian offensive, and suddenly once !!! - in the rear is already the Russian tank army.

    3) SS sometimes a little over the top. That is, if everything were limited to the usual robberies, executions, violence and destruction, which the German soldier sometimes practiced from an excess of valiant power, many more people would accept the new order with pleasure.

    4) The Russians had a T-34 tank. It was not fair. We did not have such a tank.

    5) The Russians had a lot of anti-tank guns. Each soldier had an anti-tank gun - he hid with her in the pits, in the hollows of trees, in the grass, under the roots of trees.

    6) The Russians had many Mongols and Turkmen. Mongols and Turkmen, backed up by the commissioners is a terrible thing.

    7) The Russians had commissars. Commissars is a terrible thing. A-priory. Most of the commissioners were Jews. Even zhdy. We have not destroyed our Jews in a businesslike way. Himmler was *****

    8) The Russians used a dishonest method - they pretended to give up, and then - RRA! and shot the German soldier in the back. Once, a Russian tank corps, pretended to surrender, shot a whole heavy tank battalion in the back.

    9) Russians killed German soldiers. In general, it was a terrible zapadlo, because honestly, it was the German soldiers who were supposed to kill the Russians! Russians are all ****** without exception.

    10) Allies betrayed us. In a sense, the Americans and the British.
    1. Strashila
      Strashila 23 March 2013 20: 34 New
      0
      10) Allies betrayed us. In a sense, the Americans and the British.
      ... then the list of countries of occupied Europe was to follow.
  21. Volkhov
    Volkhov 23 March 2013 14: 52 New
    +1
    An article for the demented - especially about clearing snow by trampling snow and insensitivity to shelling - who are still being dug up in battlefields and who are not in empty villages?
    Not the fact that it was written by a German at all, and not composed in the political department by the method of "free translation".
    1. George
      George 23 March 2013 18: 46 New
      +2
      Hello all.
      At one time, I was also interested in the view from the enemy.
      I caught sight of a series of books written by Germans (mostly surrendered to the Yankees and the Angles) who fought on the eastern front. I had enough for a couple of books. One is the notes of a military doctor, but the second is the diaries of a Dutch volunteer in the SS. So he had it all there: trampling the snow, and even about how our commissars drove civilians into German machine guns (Mikhalkov probably wrote the script from his book).
      But I was stopped after the episode in relation to the prisoners of war. They say they saw how some of our captured fighter grabbed bread from the table, and the soldiers of some infantry unit began to beat him. SSovtsy intervened and reminded the soldiers of the existence of a memo "Attitude towards prisoners of war", which was the peak of humanism.
      I do not read these nonsense anymore.
  22. fenix57
    fenix57 23 March 2013 15: 06 New
    +1
    I don’t know how, to you, but I am pleased to read this about a Russian soldier. It is difficult to imagine a more accurate assessment. Where are these liberals, "defenders of democracy", Kovalevs and others like that? Read what he writes about the Russian soldier, Mellenthin Friedrich von Wilhelm, a major general of tank forces who took part in the Stalingrad and Kursk battles - by definition our enemy. hi
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker 24 March 2013 13: 33 New
      +4
      Well, firstly, this is only the end of the little book ...
      Read in full - there is a frequently quoted phrase like:
      ".. the Russians have created such a wonderful instrument (read T-34), but,
      you know how to use it, you never learned ... "
      A similar "cheese in a mousetrap" for naive readers, "nimble Heinz" and other memoirists from the losing side dabbled.
      This is especially noticeable in the sections devoted to the first weeks of the onset of 1941.
      And then, describing the last months of the war, they suddenly "with surprise" notice that the Fuehrer, you see, "is not adequate" ....
      It seems to me that the most vivid contradictions in the memoirs can only be found in the diary entries of the participants in the military events. And not edited. But there are practically none.
  23. Bigriver
    Bigriver 23 March 2013 15: 36 New
    +4
    The strength of a Western soldier lies in his personal qualities, a high level of mental and spiritual development and the ability to act independently.

    Oh yeah...
    Somehow, in the 90s, he set himself the goal of revising all the weekly issues of the Die Deutsche Wochenschau film magazine for 1941. They are short, about 10 minutes. The fighting, the operational situation, the work of the front, the rear, the life of soldiers in Russia, etc.
    An interesting feeling.
    There are a lot of fragments where the Germans are shown chasing in the peasant yards for Russian-Belarusian-Russian hens and pigs. And then, with relish, it was shown how all this was fried, steamed, turned on sausage, etc. All this was interspersed with close-ups of well-fed, self-satisfied, smiling faces.
    Just very much catches the Russian eye. In our, uncivilized and spiritually underdeveloped view, this is somehow .., to put it mildly, not very: ((
    Some creatures: ((
    1. Vladimir_61
      Vladimir_61 24 March 2013 10: 27 New
      +1
      Quote: BigRiver
      The strength of a Western soldier lies in his personal qualities, a high level of mental and spiritual development and the ability to act independently.

      Well not mastered? Spirituality-developed consciousness is an alloy of the highest qualities. The author of the memoirs clearly does not understand what he is writing about. What actually happened speaks of the invasion of civilized savages: outwardly people, but inside they are wild animals.
    2. skeptic
      skeptic 24 March 2013 13: 51 New
      +1
      Quote: BigRiver
      There are a lot of fragments where the Germans are shown chasing in the peasant yards for Russian-Belarusian-Russian hens and pigs. And then, with relish, it was shown how all this was fried, steamed, turned on sausage, etc. All this was interspersed with close-ups of well-fed, self-satisfied, smiling faces.


      And now the descendants of the "lights of Western culture" are instilling in us their thieves, that is, a democratic form of economy and "spiritual development"
  24. avensis
    avensis 23 March 2013 15: 44 New
    +3
    "The Russian soldier is quite satisfied with a handful of millet or rice, adding to them what nature gives him. This closeness to nature explains the ability of the Russian to become, as it were, a part of the earth, literally dissolve in it. During the offensive, they can afford to forget about supplying troops even food, since the troops are "on the grass." The main task of the supply units is reduced to the delivery of fuel and ammunition, but even in this case, combat vehicles are often used for delivery. In the Russian motorized division, a soldier has no other "baggage", in addition, which he carries with him, and he manages to get around in cars, perched on ammunition boxes or barrels of fuel. " Mellentin F.V.
    compare
    "With such a wild ugliness in them of the human image, they are so tempered that they do not need either fire or food adapted to the taste of a person; they feed on the roots of wild herbs and the half-baked meat of all cattle, which they put on the backs of horses under their thighs and give They wander through the mountains and forests, from the cradle they learn to endure cold, hunger and thirst. And in a foreign land they enter under the roof only in case of emergency, because they do not consider themselves safe under the roof. ... They cover their bodies. linen clothes or sewn from the skins of forest mice. They have no difference between a house dress and an outside dress: but once a dirty-colored tunic around the neck is removed or replaced with another one no sooner than it crawls into rags from long-term decay. "
    Ammian Marcellin "HUNNY"
    maybe not one to one. Smiled!
    For 1500 years, nothing has changed.
    And here's another paradox:
    "This lack of vehicles leads to important tactical and psychological consequences. Since the number of vehicles in the motorized division of the Russians is much less than in the same formations of the Western armies, the Russian division is more mobile. Such a division is easier to control, it is easier to camouflage and transport it by rail. road. "- it seems that a serious man has reached the rank of general, but he carries such heresy.
    1. Bigriver
      Bigriver 23 March 2013 16: 01 New
      +2
      Quote: avensis
      ... it seems that a serious man has risen to the rank of general, but carries such heresy.

      There is another funny German general - Walter Schwabedissen.
      The book "Stalin's Falcons".
      It gives an analysis of the actions of types of Soviet aviation in different periods of the war, an assessment of the flight and command personnel, an analysis of tactics and strategies, an assessment of aviation equipment, and more.
      The most fun moments are when the general through the page talks about the lack of aggressiveness of the Russian pilots.
      Then he cites the recollections of one pilot about a fight with a Russian fighter.
      Type: well .., he knocked me out, I'm burning, I'm flying with a decline. But this seemed not enough for this Russian .., and he also decided to finish me off with a battering ram: /// I had to evacuate from the cockpit.
      In general, we did not have much aggressiveness :)))
    2. Marek Rozny
      Marek Rozny 24 March 2013 11: 16 New
      +1
      Avensis, by the way, to me, too, the descriptions of Russian soldiers in German memoirs painfully resemble the descriptions of the Huns, "Tatar-Mongols" and other nomads. And they eat what they have to eat during the campaign, and they are too aggressive in a fight, and they constantly come up with tactical tricks, dirty tricks, and are lazy, and have the gift of instantly finding themselves behind enemy lines, etc. In short, Blok was right when he wrote about the Russians: "Yes, we are Scythians, but we are Asians, with slanting and greedy eyes"))))
    3. skeptic
      skeptic 24 March 2013 13: 56 New
      0
      Quote: avensis
      “This lack of vehicles leads to important tactical and psychological consequences. Since the number of vehicles in a motorized division among the Russians is much less than in the same formations of Western armies, the Russian division is more mobile.


      Well, that's right! As long as the German mechanized divisions of melons, melons and melons arrive, the Russians will catch up with them once or twice, once or twice.
  25. Eric
    Eric 23 March 2013 17: 54 New
    +1
    Hmm ... A lot of flattering, but flattery is your first enemy. Comrades, always remain calm.
    And about intelligence and the impossibility of conveying data to the command ...
    Well, yes, we are not people, we have Sesame Street, no one understands anyone. Letters learn here. wassat
  26. zbidnev
    zbidnev 23 March 2013 19: 44 New
    +2
    The article is interesting! A professional military man is trying to assess the enemy and the reasons for his failures. This assessment is intended for a wide range, and therefore, it justifies itself to the western layman by referring to factors independent of the German generals (stupid Hitler, frosts, a large number of the enemy, limited resources, etc.) In fact, they studied us, are studying and will study us objectively and impartially, because our grandfathers and great-grandfathers won. It’s not reasonable to beat yourself in the chest and make fun of the enemy’s opinion, you need to evaluate your miscalculations (not invented but real), miscalculations of fascist Germany, Japan and allies. And as the ancient wisdom says, preparing for war because we want peace !!!
  27. bandabas
    bandabas 23 March 2013 19: 52 New
    0
    Yes, we will always do everything. ,,,, to swallow dust. Closer to us are the Germans, with whom they constantly push their foreheads. but this is a different story.
    1. Marek Rozny
      Marek Rozny 24 March 2013 11: 22 New
      +1
      "Listen, you would agree with your friends that they let us go. They are like relatives to you ..."
      "We are from the future"
  28. uizik
    uizik 23 March 2013 20: 25 New
    +1
    All the enemy characteristics to the bulb! The main thing is that the Russian soldier beat the enemy and will always beat! Remember this!
  29. Bugor
    Bugor 23 March 2013 21: 00 New
    0
    Here YARBAY brought a good document.
    Apparently, the fact of the matter is that we do not regard war as an art. For us, this is a dirty, nasty, unpleasant WORK. And we initially do this work as we used to - through the sleeves. But then, when it comes to understanding that you want to work, you don’t want to, but you have to, we put our whole soul into it.
    Imagine a little:
    Ilya Muromets was lying on the stove not because it seemed to me that he did not like art. Surely he sang songs, listened to all kinds of music, drew pictures again on a dirty stove with a dirty fingernail. Lazy, in short. But I had to rip my ass off and teach others the "art". laughing
  30. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 23 March 2013 21: 15 New
    +1
    Everything as usual. Our troops possessed an iron discipline that the enemy did not have. So ... panic attacks came! Our commanders did not show any personal initiative ... so it was impossible to predict what they would do next. They used reconnaissance poorly ... because artillery attacks were consistently delivered to headquarters located in the depths of the defense. Etc. and so on .... and the ability to cook porridge directly in the pot, using a few chips, is generally "unnatural closeness to nature" and "the ability to live on pasture." An ordinary Western dolbak who considers his intellect to be something valuable, but pitifully unable to notice the insoluble contradictions in the neighboring paragraphs of his writings. Go to the trash heap with silly chatter ...
  31. Terkin
    Terkin 23 March 2013 21: 41 New
    +3
    Non-commissioned officer Helmut Kolakowski recalls: “Late in the evening, our platoon was assembled in sheds and announced:“ Tomorrow we have to enter the battle with world Bolshevism. ” Personally, I was simply amazed, it was like snow on my head, but what about the non-aggression pact between Germany and Russia? All the time I recalled the issue of Deutsche Wohenschau, which I saw at home and which reported on the contract. I could not even imagine how we would go to war in the Soviet Union. ” The order of the Führer caused surprise and bewilderment of the rank and file. “You could say we were bewildered by what we heard,” admitted Lothar Fromm, a spotter. “We all, I emphasize this, were amazed and not at all ready for such a thing.” But perplexity was immediately replaced by relief from an incomprehensible and languid expectation on the eastern borders of Germany. Experienced soldiers who had captured almost all of Europe began to discuss when the campaign against the USSR would end. The words of Benno Zeizer, who was still studying for a military driver, reflect the general mood: “All this will end in some three weeks, we were told, others were more careful in their forecasts - they believed that in 2-3 months. There was one who thought that this would last a whole year, but we laughed him: “And how much did it take to deal with the Poles? And with France? Have you forgotten? ”
    But not everyone was so optimistic. Erich Mende, the lieutenant from the 8th Silesian Infantry Division, recalls the conversation with his superior in these last minutes of peace. “My commander was two times older than me, and he already had to fight with the Russians near Narva in 1917, when he was a lieutenant. "Here, in these vast expanses, we will find our death like Napoleon," he did not hide pessimism ... Mende, remember this hour, it marks the end of the old Germany. "

    At 3 hours and 15 minutes, the advanced German units crossed the border of the USSR. Johann Danzer, an anti-tank gunner, recalls: “On the very first day, as soon as we went on the attack, one of ours shot himself from his own weapon. Clutching a rifle between his knees, he inserted the barrel into his mouth and pressed the trigger. So for him the war ended and all the horrors associated with it. "
    General Gunter Blumentritt, chief of staff of the 4 Army: “The behavior of the Russians, even in the first battle, was strikingly different from the behavior of the Poles and allies who were defeated on the Western Front. Even being in the circle of encirclement, the Russians stubbornly defended themselves. ”

    The level of German casualties is evidenced by a report by the headquarters of the 7th Panzer Division that only 118 tanks remained in service. 166 cars were hit (although 96 were repairable). The 2nd company of the 1st battalion of the regiment "Great Germany" in just 5 days of fighting to hold the line of the Smolensk "boiler" lost 40 people with a staffing company of 176 soldiers and officers.
    1. family tree
      family tree 24 March 2013 11: 42 New
      +1
      http://flibusta.net/a/98816 Добавил, это на флибусте. Очень интересная книга, в основном письма "дойчен зольдатен" с восточного фронта.
  32. toldanger
    toldanger 23 March 2013 23: 36 New
    0
    The feat of the Russian soldier deserves the respect of descendants for centuries !.
    And actually something prevents these Geyropeytsam to win ... therefore we will hammer on these European people.
  33. jjj
    jjj 24 March 2013 01: 47 New
    0
    Which of the servants remembers the charters? Yes, almost no one. And ours are fighting, in accordance with the specific situation, using existing experience and composing some new thing on the go. Yes, and sometimes stupidity helps the cause. We know how to exist in apparent chaos, and in the chaos of war, no one else can defeat us.
  34. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn 24 March 2013 09: 53 New
    0
    The skillful and persistent work of the Communists has led to the fact that since 1917, Russia has changed in the most amazing way. There can be no doubt that the Russian is developing more and more the skill of independent action, and the level of his education is constantly growing.

    Bloody Stalinist regime?
    The army is a prism of society, and so over the years of communist rule, the country has progressed socially, people began to think more broadly and more deeply, as well as a big plus of socialism, I see a free education.
    And the fact that Stalin repressed several thousand people there can be considered a super-efficient fight against corruption, although it’s impossible not to admit that he beat in the squares, but on the other hand it was not just effective, but super effective. In general, under S., the country seriously rose, even the war did not become an obstacle to the rise of the country, or rather it became, but not as serious as if another country had appeared in the place of the USSR.
  35. galiullinrasim
    galiullinrasim 24 March 2013 12: 49 New
    +1
    all these memoirists forget to write the most important thing - they were invaders, and we defended his mother and the earth as he writes. And now they are trying to impose a Western way of life on us in different ways. but pederastism does not suit us. we love our own and sometimes other women’s strangers and they are us and they are not only bad men. So we live and God willing will live.
  36. Proud.
    Proud. 24 March 2013 13: 28 New
    +2
    Quote: Strashila
    6) The Russians had many Mongols and Turkmen. Mongols and Turkmen, backed up by the commissioners is a terrible thing.

    In addition to the commissars, there were trained wild animals
  37. wave
    wave 24 March 2013 18: 12 New
    0
    You should never be complacent. Everyone should be prepared for any surprises, since anything can happen. +
  38. Waroc
    Waroc 24 March 2013 18: 27 New
    +1
    Well what can I say - a bad dancer ...
    The Russians have massive attacks, but we, poor ones, have few soldiers, ammunition and shells to spare, tanks are inferior, etc. etc.
    And WHAT HELLO DO YOU THEN CAME WITH US USE ???
  39. RPD
    RPD 24 March 2013 20: 00 New
    0
    I read this book, it doesn’t work, although there may have been an adaptation. as von Baron didn’t understand the Russian (if you want a Soviet) soldier, so the non-Neys don’t understand
  40. RPD
    RPD 24 March 2013 20: 02 New
    0
    "Russian divisions, which had a very large composition, attacked, as a rule, on a narrow front."
  41. RPD
    RPD 24 March 2013 20: 09 New
    0
    "It is interesting that the Russian infantry soldier is not very curious, and therefore his reconnaissance usually does not give good results. Possessing the natural qualities of a scout, he makes little use of his abilities."))))) "The Russian artillery also destroyed headquarters and command posts in the depths defense. " and the intelligence of the birds brought
  42. Akuzenka
    Akuzenka 24 March 2013 20: 54 New
    0
    Already got enough to read the screams of the defeated arrogant Aryan. How we won - we were "Untermensch", how they were beaten - "filled with meat." A bad dancer is always hindered by something.
  43. Azzzwer
    Azzzwer 24 March 2013 21: 03 New
    0
    And here is another interesting from this little book:
    "2. The tactics of the Russians

    The Russian divisions, which had a very large composition, attacked, as a rule, on a narrow front. The area in front of the defenders in an instant suddenly filled with Russian

    4. Army without a wagon

    In addition, in terms of its numerical strength, any Russian rifle regiment or division is significantly inferior to the corresponding military units of the Western armies. "

    Well, where is the nice person in your words really?

    I will repeat what has been said here: the third egg interferes with a bad dancer
  44. mmrr
    mmrr 25 March 2013 01: 58 New
    0
    Look at the yotube documentary One in the Field Warrior and you will understand what a Russian soldier is.
  45. Tartary
    Tartary 25 March 2013 07: 08 New
    0
    This warrior, although generally speaking in the right direction, but carried crap in particular ... And this crap in his presentation of darkness.
    Against the background of losing the war and by the grace of God, avoiding personal responsibility for participating in the development of military plans, rounding his eyes from the previously experienced, but not passing horror, the “writer” is talking nonsense.
    It is better to be seen in the authorship of something like that than in the co-authorship of "Barbarossa" ...
  46. Gavril
    Gavril 25 March 2013 07: 17 New
    0
    Another whining about his weakness, in comparison with the Red Army, and again the Russian infantryman is to blame for everything, who does not need to sleep, eat, drink, who does not get tired, who does not kill the bombing, and artillery fire is a bedtime story for him.

    The main meaning of such works is the same: the Germans lost the war only through the fault of Hitler and his "mistakes", otherwise they would have torn the Red Army.
  47. Mak11
    Mak11 25 March 2013 17: 42 New
    0
    raving, repeating all the stamps
  48. Sirozha
    Sirozha 26 March 2013 13: 08 New
    0
    I changed all Russian words in my mind to Soviet troops and a very interesting article was obtained! Thank!