Military Review

Serbian front of the First World War

Serbian front of the First World War

28 July 1914, the Austro-Hungarian Empire declared war on Serbia. In both countries, mass mobilization of troops began. 29 July, the Austro-Hungarian forces launched artillery shelling of Belgrade. By August 12, the Austro-Hungarian command concentrated on the Serbian front 200 thousands of soldiers and launched a massive invasion. Thus began the Serbian campaign of the First World War, which cost Serbia 1,5 a million people (33% of the population).


The confrontation in the Balkans has lasted for more than a decade. The main players were the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Austria-Hungary and Italy. In addition, England and France had a certain influence, and Germany strengthened its position more and more, whose growing economic power could not but affect the growth of Berlin's influence in the region.

The Balkan Wars 1912 — 1913 and 1913 led to the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, which lost almost all of the land in Europe (while the Port did not resign and hoped to regain some influence in the region) and clash of former allies in the anti-Turkish alliance. Bulgaria was defeated by Serbia, Montenegro, Greece and Romania. In addition, Turkey opposed Bulgaria.

The collapse of the Balkan Union (bloc Serbia, Montenegro, Greece and Bulgaria) took advantage of Austria-Hungary and Germany. The Bulgarian elite was unhappy with the defeat in the Second Balkan War. Bulgaria craved revenge. Revanchist Bulgaria eventually joined the Central Powers bloc.

In turn, in the Second Balkan War, Serbia, though significantly increased, but was not fully satisfied. Belgrade did not achieve access to the sea and wanted to annex the north of Albania, which went against the policies of Austria-Hungary and Italy. In the fall of 1913, the Albanian crisis broke out - Serbia sent troops into Albania, but was forced to withdraw them under pressure from Austria-Hungary and Germany.

In addition, in Vienna they feared the emergence on their borders of a strong Serbian state, which, after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria in the Balkan Wars, could become the strongest power in the Balkan Peninsula. In Vojvodina, which belonged to Austria-Hungary, a large number of Serbs lived. Fearing separatist sentiments in Vojvodina and other Slavic lands and the complete disintegration of the empire, a significant part of the Austro-Hungarian leadership wanted to resolve the issue by force — defeat Serbia. Especially these sentiments increased after the assassination of 28 in June, the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife. The heir to the throne was a supporter of a peaceful solution to the problem - the creation of the triune state of Austria-Hungary-Slavia. Franz Ferdinand did not like the Slavs, but he categorically opposed a preventive war with Serbia. His assassination destroyed the main barrier to the war in Austria-Hungary.

Germany supported the Austro-Hungarian war party, since Serbia was on the road to pushing German capital and goods to the Balkans and the Middle East. This intensified especially after the Balkan Wars, when Serbia received the Novo-Bazar sanjak and found itself on the roads leading to Constantinople and Thessaloniki. Serbia was considered an ally of Russia, which violated Germany’s plans for the future of the Balkans and the Middle East. Germany hoped that while Austria-Hungary would be at war with Serbia and attract the attention of Russia, in the most favorable situation to deal with France.

At the same time, Serbia should not be considered a victim. Serbia was radicalized, victories in two wars at once and a sharp strengthening of the state brought up a strong national boom. Plans to create "Great Serbia" were very popular. Various nationalist, right-wing radical organizations, which aimed at the collapse of Austria-Hungary and the separation of the Slavic lands from it, some of which were supposed to be included in the “Great Serbia”, intensified. The Black Hand group was organized, which controlled virtually all authorities, its branch Mlada Bosna, operated in Bosnia, planning to separate this area from the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

It is also necessary to take into account that among the organizers of “Black Hand” there were masons who were guided by their sister structures in other European countries. And the Masons, in turn, were one of the structures so-called. "Financial international" - "golden elite", which ruled France, England and the United States. "Financial International" has long been preparing Europe for a big war, which was supposed to strengthen their power in the world. A provocation was needed that would launch the process of the start of a world war. This provocation was organized by the Serbian brothers-masons.

28 June Franz Ferdinand was killed. The murderer and his comrades were associated with the nationalist Serbian organization Black Hand, which had the support of a number of senior officers of the Serbian military intelligence. The provocation was perfect. In Vienna, they decided that the reason was good for the military defeat of Serbia. 5 July, Germany promised to support the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the event of a conflict with Serbia. In Berlin, they also considered that the moment was ideal for the start of the war and the defeat of France. Vienna and Berlin made a strategic miscalculation, considering that they are implementing their game. Although in reality they fell into a trap that had long been prepared, which was to lead to the destruction of the German and Austro-Hungarian empires, as well as Russia, which was to stand up for Serbia.

On July 23, the Austro-Hungarian envoy to Serbia Baron Gizl von Gieslinger handed a note with an ultimatum to the Serbian government. Part of the requirements of this ultimatum were related to the sovereignty of the country and were obviously unacceptable for Belgrade. So, the Serbian government had to stop the massive anti-Austrian propaganda, dismiss the organizers of this campaign, dissolve the nationalist organization Narodn Odbrana, arrest the officers who organized the murder of Franz Ferdinand and allow the official representatives of Austria-Hungary to the territory of Serbia to investigate the assassination attempt the archduke. Serbia had to respond to the ultimatum in 48 hours. At the same time, Vienna began preparations for the mobilization of the armed forces.

Belgrade realized that it smelled of roast and the Serbian government was in a hurry. Serbia has not had time to recover from the two Balkan wars, the country was not ready for war. The government of Pashich, like most of the bourgeoisie, was currently afraid of war. Prince Regent Alexander asked his uncle - the king of Italy, to act as a mediator. At the same time, Belgrade asked St. Petersburg for help. “We cannot defend ourselves,” wrote Prince Regent Alexander in an address to Emperor Nicholas II, “therefore we beg your Majesty to assist us as soon as possible.” Your Majesty has so often assured her of free will, and we secretly hope that this appeal will find a response in your noble Slavic heart. ” In Petersburg, they were not very happy about this situation; in recent years Russia has more than once had to act as a peacemaker in the Balkans.

However, at an emergency meeting of the Russian government, it was decided to provide comprehensive diplomatic assistance to Belgrade. Petersburg advised to accept the demands of Vienna. Serbia unconditionally accepted the eight requirements of Austria-Hungary, and one with a reservation (the presence of Austrian investigators on Serbian soil). Belgrade offered to consider this issue in an international court in The Hague.

But Vienna waited for such an answer. The beginning of the war was practically resolved. On July 25, the Austrian envoy Baron Gizl von Gieslinger said the answer is unsatisfactory and diplomatic relations between the two powers are broken. At this time, French Prime Minister Raymond Poincaré visited the Russian capital and both powers solemnly reaffirmed their obligations to each other. In St. Petersburg and Paris, they considered that if firmness was shown, there would be no war, Vienna and Berlin would give way. “Weakness towards Germany always leads to problems, and the only way to avoid danger is to show firmness,” said Poincare. England, which had long wished for war in Europe, also supported the Allies.

There is a telegram from Petersburg to Belgrade: Begin mobilization, be firm - there will be help. In turn, in Vienna they were convinced that Russia, disappointed with the previous policy of Serbia, would not fight for it. In Austria-Hungary it was believed that the case would end with a diplomatic protest of the Russian empire, and the Russians would not enter the war. The chief of the Austrian General Staff, Conrad von Götzöndorf (Hötzendorf), said: "Russia is only threatening, so we should not abandon our actions against Serbia." In addition, he strongly overestimated the strength of the Austro-Hungarian army, thinking that it would be able to stand on equal terms with the Russian army. Berlin also pushed Vienna towards the start of the war, instead of holding back an ally. The German Kaiser and his closest advisers assured the Austrians that Russia was not ready for war (which was true) and that Austria-Hungary needed to take Belgrade so that the Serbs fulfilled all the conditions of Vienna. In Serbia and Austria-Hungary began to mobilize. The Serbian government with the treasury moved from Belgrade to Niš, since the capital was located near the border and was vulnerable to the Austro-Hungarian invasion.

Austria-Hungary was seized by anti-Serb hysteria. A longtime supporter of Serbia’s military solution, Prime Minister Count Istvan Tisa, said: “The monarchy must make energetic decisions and demonstrate its ability to survive and put an end to the unbearable conditions in the southeast” (he called southeast Serbia). A wave of mass anti-Serb demonstrations swept through all the major Austrian cities, where the Serbs were called a "gang of murderers." In Vienna, the crowd nearly crushed the Serbian embassy. Serbian pogroms began in the cities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Vojvodina. In Bosnia, it came to the point that under the auspices of the local authorities, Muslim paramilitary units were formed, which launched terror against the Serbs. Various Serbian associations and organizations - educational, cultural, sporting (many of which were actually created by Serbian intelligence and with Serbian money), were closed, their property was confiscated.

On July 28, the Austro-Hungarian Empire declared war on Serbia. On the night of July 28-29, long-range artillery of the Austro-Hungarian army began shelling Belgrade. The Danube monitors also participated in the shelling. flotilla. July 31, Austria-Hungary began a general mobilization.

Alexander I Karageorgievich (1888 — 1934)

Austrian War Plan

Initially, the Austro-Hungarian command planned to deploy against Serbia three armies totaling more than 400 thousand men (2 / 5 of all the forces of the army). These armies formed the army group of General Potiorek: the 2-I army occupied positions along the Sava and Danube currents, the 5-I army - along the left bank of the r. Driny to its confluence with r. Sava and the 6 Army in Bosnia between Sarajevo and the Serbian border. The Austro-Hungarian armies were to invade Serbia and allied Montenegro and bypass the Serbian troops from both flanks. The commander-in-chief of the Austro-Hungarian army was the Duke of Teschinsky, Friedrich of Austria. The head of the general staff was Franz Konrad von Höttsendorf.

However, Berlin forced Vienna to make adjustments to these plans. In Germany, they believed that a powerful barrier should be set against Russia. The German command demanded the participation of the Austro-Hungarian infantry divisions against the Russian Empire 40. The Austro-Hungarian military command was forced to leave against Serbia the entire 1 / 5 part of all available forces (5 and 6 army), and 2 army (190 thousand soldiers) to transfer from Sava and Danube to Eastern Galicia. Against Serbia at the beginning of the war, more than seven army corps were displayed.

Therefore, the Austro-Hungarian governor of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces in the Balkans and Commander of the 6 Austrian-Hungarian Army Oscar Potiorek decided to abandon active offensive operations on the Danube front and the lower course of Sava and carry out only demonstrative actions. For this purpose, the 7 Army Corps, located in the Temesvara area, was designed. He was supported by the Hungarian military units (Honved) and the Landsturm (Militia). But they decided to launch a decisive offensive from the River Driny in the five corps of the 5 and 6 armies: the 4, 8, 13, and parts of the 15 and 16. Part of the forces of the 15 and 16 corps were to oppose the Montenegrin army. The 9 Army Corps units were in reserve between Sava and Drina.

Oscar Potiorek (1853 - 1933)

Serbia mobilization and plans

The Serbian army, after the Balkan wars and the expansion of the country's territory, has undergone a complete reorganization. The number of infantry divisions in the army increased from 5 to 10. The first conscription classes (men 21-30 years) formed five divisions and one cavalry division, large-caliber and mountain artillery. In addition, the surplus of these draft age allowed the formation of six additional infantry regiments in Old Serbia and one division in New Serbia (Serbian Macedonia). The second conscription classes (30-38 years) also formed five divisions, but of incomplete composition. There were three regiments in the divisions, not four, only one artillery group (12 guns) instead of three (36 guns). The command distributed new Macedonian regiments between the Old Serb garrisons, where they were replenished to the state of war. The third conscription classes (38-45 years) formed the police - one regiment and a squadron for each conscription district.

In addition, volunteers, road guards, railway personnel, etc. were subject to mobilization. As a result, Serbia could put up more than 400 thousand people. The main strike force was represented by 12 infantry and 1 cavalry divisions (about 240 thousand people). However, the problem of the Serbian army was a shortage weapons, especially artillery and ammunition, ammunition. And the two Balkan wars significantly thinned the arsenals. They have not had time to replenish. Russia promised 400 thousand rifles, but in the summer 1914 of the year managed to deliver only 128 thousand. The strength of the Serbian army was the combat experience, morale and character of the upcoming war (it was necessary to defend the Motherland).

Voevoda, Chief of the General Staff of Serbia during the Balkan Wars and the First World War Radomir Putnik (1847 - 1917)

The war against Austria-Hungary was popular in society, patriotic attitudes after two victorious wars prevailed in Serbia. Moreover, Serbia has been a militarized society for centuries. Therefore, despite the fact that the mobilization was announced in the midst of field work, 80% spare was mobilized on the first day. But, in new areas of Serbia, mobilization did not go so smoothly. There were numerous cases of desertion in Bulgaria. The Serbian government was even forced to turn to the Bulgarian government, demanding to prohibit the passage of fugitives across the Serbian-Bulgarian border, which violated the neutrality declared by Bulgaria.

The Prince Regent of the Serbian Kingdom, Alexander I Karageorgievich, was the Commander-in-Chief of the Serbian army, the voivode (corresponding to the rank of field marshal) Radomir Putnik - Chief of the General Staff. Belgrade worked through two variants of the war with Austria-Hungary: 1) alone; 2) in alliance with Russia. The Serbs did not have any information about the forces that Austria-Hungary would put up, nor about the strategic deployment of the enemy’s armies. Much depended on whether Russia would fight. In general, the Serbian plan of war assumed defensive actions at the beginning of the war. Serbia did not have the forces to invade Austria-Hungary, especially until a decisive change in Galicia (with the participation of Russia in the war).

The Serbian command took into account that the Austro-Hungarian armies could strike from two strategic directions. To the north of the Danube and Sava, Austria-Hungary had a developed network of communications and was able to concentrate the main forces in the Banat region in order to seize the Serbian capital first and, at the second stage, advance the Morava valley and Kolubara inland, to capture Kragujevac (the main arsenal of Serbia ). However, here the Austrian offensive was complicated by the fact that they needed to overcome the Serbian defenses on the first-class water frontiers of the Danube and Sava. In addition, the Serbian troops could try to cover the Austro-Hungarian troops.

Its advantages had a blow from the Drina, from west to east. Here the Austro-Hungarian troops rested the left flank on their territory, and the right - in remote mountains, which protected them from possible coverage. However, in the Drinsky direction, the rugged highlands, with a small number of roads, favored the Serbian defense. Serbs were on their land. On the Bulgarian side, the Serbian army was covered by Timok, Morava and the mountain range between them.

According to the two main directions and outlined the options for the deployment of the Serbian troops. The Serbian command had to wait until the moment when the general situation became clearer. The deployment area was supposed to be covered by the Sava and Danube currents from the north, which they considered to be the main one, and they also took into account the likelihood of the enemy's attack from the west and north-west.

According to these directions, the Serbian troops were consolidated into the 4 army (in fact, corps or detachments). The 1 Army under the command of Petar Boyovich had to keep the 100 km along the Danube front. Its main forces were concentrated in the area of ​​Palanka, Racha and Topola. The army included: 4 infantry and 1 cavalry divisions. Under the command of General Stefanovich, the 2 Army was a maneuverable group in the Belgrade area and consisted of the 4 infantry divisions of the first stage. The 3 Army under the command of General Jurishich-Sturm also represented a maneuverable group in the Valyev region and consisted of two infantry divisions and two detachments. The 4 Army (Uzhitska Army) under the command of General Boyanovic covered the valley of the Upper Morava from the western direction and provided communication with Montenegro. It consisted of two infantry divisions. In addition, 60-th. Montenegrin army unfolded in the border zone on its territory, supporting the left flank of the 4 Serbian army.

Thus, a large part of the Serbian army was a maneuverable group, covered by the natural defensive lines of the Danube, Sava and Drava rivers, which defended the reserve units of the third conscription. In general, the Serbian army, with limited capabilities, had a favorable (middle) position for the struggle and was ready to act in internal operational areas. In case of successful development of the situation, the maneuverable group was ready to launch an offensive operation in the Srem region or in Bosnia.

The weak point was the possibility of participation in the war of Bulgaria on the side of Austria-Hungary. Then Serbia would have to fight on two fronts. Forces for conducting combat operations on two fronts at Serbia was not. The Austro-Hungarian Empire linked all the forces of the Serbian army. In the event of a war on two fronts, Serbia was under threat of a military-political catastrophe.

Map source: Korsun N. G. Balkan Front of World War 1914-1918

To be continued ...

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Pazifist87
    Pazifist87 29 July 2014 09: 59
    Very interesting article, thanks.
  2. parusnik
    parusnik 29 July 2014 10: 00
    We must pay tribute, the Serbs fought bravely ..
    1. armageddon
      armageddon 29 July 2014 11: 01
      Hmm ... I agree ... But how ALWAYS for ALL Russia was blown away !!!
    2. Rastas
      Rastas 29 July 2014 12: 20
      By the way, in the biography of J.B. Tito read an interesting episode: "Once the Serbs surrounded a part of the Austro-Hungarian army and invited it to surrender." Surrender, otherwise you will all die like fools! They shouted. "When did you see the Serbs surrender?" - answered them in Serbian from the Austrian trenches.
  3. pinecone
    pinecone 29 July 2014 10: 12
    In addition, Vienna feared the emergence of a strong Serbian state on its borders, which, after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria in the Balkan wars, could become the strongest power on the Balkan Peninsula.

    The statement is not entirely correct, since in the 2nd Balkan War the Ottoman Empire was among the winners, regaining part of East Thrace, primarily Adrianople, the capture of which cost the Bulgarians great sacrifices.
    1. Oprychnik
      Oprychnik 29 July 2014 19: 38
      The author is absolutely right. In the first Balkan Bulgaria was an opponent of the Turks in alliance with Serbia, Greece, Montenegro. And became one of the winners. And in the second Balkan, it became the defeated coalition of Serbia, Montenegro, Greece +
      Romania and Turkey. The author says "" could, "but not.
  4. Bagatur
    Bagatur 29 July 2014 11: 09
    At that time, 700 Bulgarians lived in Macedoania! Serbia staged a real genocide - the teachers and confessors of the Bulgarian church either killed or expelled! When the future king Alexander Karageorgevich asked 000 Bulgarian girls in Skopje - "Pa shcha si ti?" (What kind) and received a Bulgarian in response, he beat the child in face! So do not surprise yourself brothers for what the Slavs dralis in 2. After the so-called. The Ohridsko-Debarsko rebellion of the Bulgarians when 1913 were beaten by a Serb, she could not beat about reconciliation and roar. The fact that the warrior for Serbia did not want a bogar is completely understandable, they deserted and surrendered, and then Austria-Hungary deported them to Bulgaria. When in 20 Bulgaria entered against Serbia out of 000 I, the Bulgarian army - more than 1915 - consisted of 242 Macedonian infantry divisions - from the commander General Petar Darving to the last Kashavar, a native of Maokedonia! In total, 000% of the officers of the Bulgarian army including .30% of the hanging composition - the commanders of the regiment, brigades and divisions - from Macedonia, they had a war against Serbia! For example, General Kliment Boyadzhiev commander! army in 000, a native of the city of Ohrid (only from this the Bulgarian capital at the end of the 11th-beginning of the 10th century 30 generals of the Bulgarian army left).

    Bulgarian rulers for standing on the country Germany I will not justify but this is another topic! Russia went to save Serbia and lost the empire and weight of the twentieth century!
    1. goose
      goose 29 July 2014 11: 47
      Tell me, are the Bulgarians one nation? I have no data.
      1. pytar
        pytar 29 July 2014 12: 28
        We are one nation and one people! Mizia, Thrace, Macedonia - these are the three geographical areas in the Bolkans, where the Bulgarian people live for 1300 years! The Bulgarian nation was formed from the union and merger of the Slavs, prabolgar / have nothing in common with the Turkic peoples / and Thracians. Since the Slavs constituted the majority, the Slavic language became the language of the Bulgarian nation. The well-known love of rural Bulgaria among the Bulgarians can also be considered to have come from the Slavs. Prabolgars brought with them the ability to organize statehood and the army, as they had thousands of years of experience as a state-forming people. In the early Middle Ages, the Bulgarian army combined the strength of the Slavic infantry with the strike force of the Prab-Bulgarian cavalry. This allowed her to successfully oppose the powerful army of the Byzantine Empire and against the steppe peoples, such as the Hungarians, etc. The wine culture of the Thracians led to the Bulgarian nation, local zanayats, songs and dances as well as many more. The Bulgarians were one of the first Slavic to accept Orthodoxy as a state religion, which greatly contributed to the formation of a single nation. Slavic-Bulgarian preachers spread Orthodoxy to the east and to the north from other Slavs. Due to the proximity and influence of Byzantine culture, Bulgaria has long been the center of cumulation of Slavic literature. Slavic letters from our lands spread throughout the world. We rightly consider the Cyrillic our business and are proud of this. In our history there were great victories and rises, as well as terrible defeats and tragedies. There was also the Golden Age of Slavic-Bulgarian writing and literature, as well as the subsequent 5 of the centuries-old Turkish slavery, during which the Bulgarian people almost disappeared from the history of the world. The geographical location of Bulgaria is such that it always caused all sorts of aggressors and conquerors. Bulgaria was going through very difficult times, and ksati was also such a time for us! But we believe that Bulgaria, like 1300 has lived for years, will still live many centuries ahead!
        1. Oprychnik
          Oprychnik 29 July 2014 18: 53
          "The Bulgarian nation was formed from the union and merger of the Slavs, the Proto-Bulgarians / have nothing in common with the Turkic peoples / and the Thracians"

          As far as I know, it was the Türks who took a significant part in the ethnogenesis of the Bulgarians, in particular, immigrants from the Volga Bulgaria. Yes, and the Ottomans did not pass by. And maybe I did not understand your idea.
          1. pytar
            pytar 29 July 2014 22: 16
            The scientific community adhered to this opinion, until the first year in its mashchabs finished / covered almost all countries in Europe / DNA research of the genotypes of modern Bulgarians. The result was fundamentally changed by pre-modern views on the origin of the great-Bulgarians. In short, I will list the main conclusions that the scientists made: The most, one might say, sensational result - modern Bulgarians have nothing in common genetically with the Turks and with the Turkic peoples in general. And this is due to the fact that the lot of the Proto-Bulgarian genes in the modern Bulgarians turned out to be much higher than expected. In the genetic table, the Proto-Bulgarians are at the other extreme relative to the Turkic peoples. Those. Proto-Bulgarians are not Türks, but it has not yet been established with which other ethnos they were close or Rodnilis. What concerns the influence of Turkic blood in modern Bulgarians as a result of 5 centuries of slavery, this has not been established, which is also unexpected for science. The fact is explained by the fact that the Bulgarians, as subordinates, did not marry the Turks and the Bulgarians preferred abortion if they were victims of sexual abuse by the Turks. That is little known, but such tragedies often became a topic for folk legends and songs. Bulgarian blood, as well as from all porous Bolkan peoples, "flowed" to the Turks. The Turks took Bulgarian girls for their harems, and the Bulgarian boys were forcibly taken away for education / reformatting as they say / in enichars. And as a result, the "Turks" became adopting Islam and forgetting their language and culture. With a population of about 2,5 million during the conquest of Bulgaria by the Turks / the same was the population of England at that time /, the Bulgarian ethnos for 200 years under the Turkish yoke and as a result of the genocide decreased to a few 150-200 thousand. Many of today's Turks, especially in the European part of Turkey, have Bulgarian genes in their DNA. In the current Turkish anthropological type, Slavic-European features of the population are clearly visible in the European part of Turkey and Asiatic-Türkic features in its Asia Minor part. The same study unequivocally confirmed the dominance of the Slavic genotype in the DNA of the present Bulgarians. Those. modern Bulgarians are Slavs, albeit a little special. A significant contribution was also made by the Thracians, about whom it was still believed that there was an insignificant minority in the Balkans. As an ethnically close people to the Bulgarians, the study identified Croats / in Serbia this study was not carried out /, which is due to the genetic identity of Serbs and Croats , confirms the South Slavic genotype of the present Bulgarians. Genetic affinity has been established with the current population of northern Italy. It is explained by the fact that large groups of Proto-Bulgarians settled in Northern Italy at a time when another group settled on the Bolkans. In that part of Italy, the Proto-Bulgarians were quite numerous and the Italian language even changed as a result of the Proto-Bulgarian influence. There are other interesting conclusions, but I think there is no place here to go into details.
            1. Oprychnik
              Oprychnik 29 July 2014 23: 56
              Interesting post. Today in VO there is also a message in the news on a similar topic. Only one thing I don’t understand how these collections are done on genetics. I know for sure that in my family there are Astrakhan Tatars, Tungus, Poles, Zaporozhye Cossacks, Mordvinians, and a couple of other bloods. I don’t want to offend you completely, but at the end of the 70s, when I lived and studied in Orenburg, we had a lot of Bulgarians working. In their appearance, they were more related ... Well, let's say, to the Mediterranean race. They are all dark and dark-haired, and usually stocky. Perhaps there were many Turks among them, and you have them. I am forced to say that in spite of so much blood mixed with me, my appearance is purely Aryan - light blond, tall, long-headed. Then think about genetics. There are recessive and dominant genes, although I am not a great specialist in genetics, perhaps this is the case. And perhaps studies are made to order.
              1. pytar
                pytar 30 July 2014 01: 37
                You know ... We live a lot of Turks and Gypsies. They are, in their majority, abroad always represented as Bulgarians. Usually our Gypsies are Bulgarian names. And they worked in the USSR exactly. Many have returned with a Russian woman! I look like the purest Aryan. I taxi drivers at sea, often confused with the Russian or Germans. But really, we have all sorts of types. Mediterranean type, remained from the Thracians and the Greeks with us. That study, about which I speak, is seen through the EU line in all countries of the union. Serious scientific institutions, with authority and tradition. But not that important ... I know I think that a person is from the nation from which he is considered! Self-consciousness determines nationality!
  5. Rastas
    Rastas 29 July 2014 12: 26
    Normal article. There were no righteous people in that war; all the countries that took part in it were dirty with dirt. And Serbia in 1914 is very similar to Poland in 1939, which Churchill called the hyena of Europe. Still, enough Serbia and Poland to make such innocent victims. The same Serbia, before the WWII, was only doing that it was trying to chop off pieces of neighboring states by pursuing a nationalist great-Serb policy in the annexed territories. In July 14, Russian Foreign Minister Sazonov asked his Serbian counterpart in response to his cries for help, why did you provoke a war if you realized that you had no chance.
    1. Bagatur
      Bagatur 29 July 2014 15: 33
      Precisely! After the war, Alexander Karageorgevich himself admitted that Serbia consciously let Russia down, counting on Pan-Slavic solidarity! I can’t understand what happened fatally for Russia if she left Serbia in 1914? Is it true that during the war, even if not for many years, the two that complete the military reform did not give much more strategic benefits?
      1. Oprychnik
        Oprychnik 29 July 2014 19: 10
        Russia would still be dragged into the war. Only one ally would become less.
    2. trilips
      trilips 30 July 2014 10: 13
      I disagree with "Serbia before WWI only did what it tried to chop off pieces of neighboring states" Serbia did not have time for this, since Serbia was beating under the Turks for 5 centuries - until the end of the 19th century
      1. pytar
        pytar 30 July 2014 13: 39
        You are wrong! Serbian chauvinism after the restoration of Serbian statehood, has reached unimaginable dimensions! Malenkaya Serbia had megalistic ambitions! And Serbia really used every opportunity, to slap off the neighbors of the land. Just look at the map and understand everything. Almost half of the territory, even the current heavily reduced Serbia, is the land bitten off from its neighbors. As the acquisition of new territory, the Serbs pulled out the local non-Serb population and assimilated those who remained there. After the collapse of Yugoslavia in the 90s, this was the reason for the lengthy bloody conflicts. Unfortunately, as a result of Serbia’s weakness and in the absence of strong allies with her, she also lost the original Serbian lands, such as Kosovo. I am glad that, largely because of the understanding of the situation on both sides, the conflict between Bulgaria and Serbia was avoided. Again, I repeat, the Slavs in the Balkans can survive, only in a union on the buzz, with the general culture and Vera. Orthodox Bulgarians, Serbs, Macedonians and Montenegrins will be forced to leave, otherwise everything will disappear and become history.
        1. trilips
          trilips 30 July 2014 19: 38
          from your comment I like only the last sentence, and I don’t think that such a small state surrounded by large territorial countries can have imperial ambitions, especially Serbia. It has never waged a war of aggression but only a war of liberation, because it was always attacked by neighboring states.
          1. pytar
            pytar 30 July 2014 23: 16
            Well ... I don't like it, I don't like it! It happens ... Do not like the facts. It seems to me that you are looking at Serbia with very pink glasses. I'm talking about the story. There are other times. For your information, the liberation war is fought when the goal is to liberate the territories for which the vast majority of its population live. A conquering, when the goal is to conquer the territory inhabited with another population. I put two cards where you can see what territory the Bulgarian ethnic group occupied by the beginning of the previous century. Compare with the borders of the states and everything will be very clear. Bulgaria did not wage war in order to occupy some other territory. Not a single heel of the land was occupied in her campaigns, for the period after her liberation from Turkish slavery. Serbia, initially, sought to expand at the expense of its Slavic fellow tribesmen to the northwest. Croats, Slovenes, they are also Serbs, but Catholics. But Austria-Hungary did not allow her there, so Serbia was oriented toward the south and southeast. This is already called conquest.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. pytar
              pytar 30 July 2014 23: 27
              Unfortunately not inserted. Dame link. Accommodation Bulgarian ethnos to 1978 g. C dense green color - the current territory of the Republic of Belarus. From the red line - the border of San Stefana Bulgaria. With pale green color - the territory in which the population of the community is self-identified as the Bulgarians.
  6. pytar
    pytar 29 July 2014 12: 59
    Historically, Serbia's policy has always distinguished itself with hostility and meanness towards Bulgaria. This has always surprised the Bulgarians and caused bewilderment! In everyday life, Bulgarians have always counted and are considered Serbs, the very close ethnic and even mentally people. The aggressiveness of the Serbs towards the Bulgarians is in many respects irrational and contrary to all logic. My explanation is simple: the Bulgarian nation for centuries was the most numerous on the Bolkans and occupied the largest part of the peninsula. In cultural terms, the Bulgarian people have always been at the forefront and thanks to their proverbial diligence and passion for learning, they achieved much better prosperity than, for example, the Serbs. Bulgarians never looked at Serbs as a threat and underestimated the ambitions of their "little" brother. The Serbian mentality is characterized by strong nationalism and claims to leadership among the Balkan peoples. The main obstacle for the implementation of their mega-ambitions, the Serbian kings and kings saw in Bulgaria, for that they did not miss every opportunity to take advantage of the problems that Bulgaria already had a lot. Relations between Serbs and Bulgarians, I can compare with those that developed between Ukrainians and Russians. Truth in everyday life, this does not notice, and indeed the word has weight that nations are wiser than their rulers. It seems to me that over time, due to ordinary circumstances, the Serbs and Bulgarians will finally remove all the negatives that have remained between us from the past. It is quite real, I think, the future union of our Slavic states.
    1. trilips
      trilips 30 July 2014 10: 22
      In your comments one can feel a "quiet hatred" for the Serbs, and the fact that they do not like Bulgarians, I will answer so briefly:
      - PMV - 1914-1917 Bulgaria committed such atrocities in SE Serbia that according to old-timers it’s never to be forgotten there
      - WWII - on whose side did Bulgaria fight? - can you tell me, on the side of the FYaists and again against the Serbs
      - 1999, the month of May, Bulgaria gave airspace to NATO countries and an intensive bombardment of the city of Niš in the south of Serbia began - and in broad daylight in the CENTRAL MARKET where there is still a monument to civilians who died there. SO tell me please, do the Serbs have reasons to love YOU ?? I doubt it - after 3 single betrayals in 100 years
      1. pytar
        pytar 30 July 2014 13: 57
        I even laughed at your comment! :)))))))) Probably every current Bulgarian will be confused!
        There is absolutely no "quiet hatred" towards the Serbs! No hate at all, dear trilips! The fact that we are commenting on historical facts, while they negatively developed on our relations with Serbia, has nothing to do with the current reality! It is quite clear about every Bulgarian and it is unlikely that you will find at least one who will speak with hatred against the Serbs, for excluding the few nationalists.
        -PMV - 1914-1917 - Bulgarians repaired atrocities in retaliation for the atrocities that the Serbs had repaired us. Very controversial, who tried harder! We or the Serbs. There is no excuse for us or for them, of course.
        “WWII fought the Bulgarians on whose side?” They can tell you, on the side of the FYaschists and again against the Serbs, “Sorry, but you are showing complete ignorance!” You do not know the story! Bulgaria forcing into the Tristran Pact, did not fight on the side of Germany! Neither the USSR nor against Yugoslavia. The Bulgarian occupation corps entered Macedonia after Germany defeated Yugoslavia within a month. Our troops in Macedonia, entered the Bulgarian land and met from the local Bulgarian population as liberators! Operations were conducted against the Yugoslav partisans, KSAT, such operations were carried out against the Bulgarian communist partisans on the territory of Bulgaria itself! In 1944, Bulgaria actually entered the war by conducting military operations ... on the side of the Allies against Germany! 3 BG army total 400 heap. soldiers in the Third Ukrainian Front, liberated Yugoslavia from the Germans, and reached Hungary through Austria, where they met the end of the war. BG army gave about 36 dead killed and wounded.
        -About the Yugoslav event in 1999, I wrote to another cometary.
        And in general ... better try to get acquainted with the facts, instead of replicating the same templates distributed from the Internet.
        1. trilips
          trilips 30 July 2014 19: 45
          I write information that I don’t read on the Internet and that friends who live there told me - there are names in the south of Serbia and believe me a lot and I know their mood and the fact that you write that Bulgaria freed Yugoslavia from the Germans makes me laugh more than desire to comment
          1. pytar
            pytar 30 July 2014 22: 54
            Are you sure that everything is clear to you with etim ??? What kind of Serbian south are you talking about? I do not know what your local friends inform, but I often visit my friends there! As for the historical fact about the participation of the First BG Army in the liberation of Yugoslavia from Germany, there is simply no need to argue. Like it or not, it's a fact. There are exact data, and even recently there were live majority of participants. I worked with three, until they retired.
    2. Lazar
      Lazar 2 December 2014 21: 45
      Tell me, do you believe in what you write? You've obviously never met a single Serb. Serbia from 1818 was not under the direct control of the Turks, but from 1833 it was de facto independent. From 1833 to 1878 the Serbs wanted to help the Bulgarians, they received the warmth of the Bulgarian refugees and Milos and Mihajlo Obrenovic gave donations to new Bulgarian schools and the press. In Serbia, all the unreleased peoples of the Ottoman Empire were considered natural allies. The problem would not have happened if Austria-Hungary did not occupy Bosnia, Herzegovina and Sandzak and so blocked the road to the spread of Serbia in the west and prevented the connection between Serbia and Montenegro. Just like Bulgarians, Serbs wanted national liberation and unification wherever they live. Kosovo, Raska, Herzegovina, Bosnia, Montenegro were important to them. They knew very little about Macedonia, but they knew that in the north around Kumanovo and north of Skopje people celebrated Glory and they considered them Serbs. They don't care about Macedonian holidays. That all changed when King Milan Obrenovic became obsessed with Serbia getting landlocked. Macedonia has become a theater of war propaganda between Serbs, Greeks and Bulgarians. When Bulgaria wanted to unite, the people in Serbia were sympathetic to the Bulgarians and were shocked when the King of Milan declared war on Bulgaria "to maintain the balance of power." People en masse avoided conscription, and commanders refused orders. it nearly cost the King of Milan the crown. In total, less than 1500 people died in this war. Ordinary people have never hated Bulgarians. What have we done for you to make you hate us so much? What Bulgaria did to Serbia in 1915 was terrible and despicable even for a former enemy. Was this for Macedonia 1913? The people there hate you more than us. The people raised a massive uprising in southern Serbia against the Bulgarians in 1917. In World War II, Bulgaria occupied most of central Serbia and not just the south (which was attached). By 1943, the Bulgarian occupation zone included villages south of Belgrade and spread westward as far as Valjevo. Are there Bulgarov in Kragujevac or Kraljevo? We would have respected you more if you at least remained loyal to the Germans, but you betrayed them too. The participation of Bulgarians in Yugoslavia on the side of the USSR was symbolic. Today people in Serbia do not hate Bulgarians, but you have earned a reputation as a neighbor for stabbing in the back, as well as a nation that was on the side that was against Russia twice.
  7. Nikolav
    Nikolav 29 July 2014 14: 57
    "Historically, Serbia's policy has always distinguished itself with hostility and meanness towards Bulgaria."

    No wonder. The first war between the Bulgarians and Serbs, provoked by the Byzantines, occurred during the reign of Khan Presian in 839–842, followed by many wars between them until the 15th century, when the Ottomans captured both countries. Then there was the war of 1885. Then the second Balkan. Bulgarians fought with the Serbs in the First World War since September 1915. Well, finally, in the Second World War, the Bulgarians also participated in the counter-guerrilla war on the side of Germany. There is no reason for you to love each other. Although there have been periods of good relations.
  8. Roman 1977
    Roman 1977 29 July 2014 16: 30
    The most famous Serbian unit during the First World War was the Iron 2 Infantry Regiment named after Prince Mikhailo - an infantry regiment formed during the time of Peter I Karageorgievich. During the Balkan Wars proved to be a brave and successful regiment. The iron regiment numbered about 20 000 Toplians (residents of the Toplichsky okrug). Official name: 2-th Infantry Regiment named after Prince Mikhailo. The Iron Regiment is an unofficial name assigned to the regiment after the Second Balkan War, in which about 50% of the soldiers and officers of the regiment died.
    The 2th Infantry Regiment named after Prince Mikhailo was formed in October 1912 in the town of Prokuplye in the Toplichsky District. At first, the regiment was recruited from the soldiers of the Moravian division, guys aged 21 - 31 years, who took part in all the battles in which Serbia participated from September 1912 year to mid-December 1918 year.
    During the Second Balkan War, in battles with the Bulgarians, the regiment lost more than half of the soldiers, regiment commander, all battalion commanders and companies. It was after the Second Balkan War that the regiment became known as Iron. The regiment became famous and when, after the famous assault on the 650 heights and the breakthrough of the Bulgarian front, he took part in the Battle of Bregennitsa.
    During World War I, the regiment participated in the Battle of Cer, which culminated in the first Allied victory over Austria-Hungary. It was then that the Serbs brilliantly defeated the Croatian regiment of Josip Jelacic. The Iron Regiment also distinguished itself at the Battle of Kolubar. Seeing how his people were dying, the regiment commander Milivoj Stoyanovich personally led the regiment during a new assault, but died heroically after the capture of Kremenitsa. In his honor, the Serbian composer Stanislav Binichki wrote the famous "March to the Drina". The command over the regiment was transferred to Dmitry Milich.
    1. Roman 1977
      Roman 1977 29 July 2014 16: 32
      At the beginning of 1915, the regiment was transferred to Macedonia to strengthen the front with Bulgaria. After the special request of King Peter I Karageorgievich for brave soldiers, the Iron Regiment defended the Serbian army retreating through the territory of Albania. The 2th regiment named after Prince Mikhailo was the last to leave Serbian territory. After retreating to Corfu, the regiment was reorganized, its soldiers underwent short training and returned to the front. He took part in the battle of Gornitsevsk, defeating the enemy and starting his pursuit. After September 25, 1916 soldiers of the Iron Regiment captured 5 Bulgarian officers, 804 soldiers and non-commissioned officers, captured four guns, 7 machine guns, 600 rifles, etc.
      In these battles, two women participated in the 2 Iron Regiment named after Prince Mikhailo: Milunka Savich and Flora Sands, who were later awarded the Order of the Star of Karageorgy.

      In the center is Flora Sands.
      The regiment participated in the battle of Czern, when Serbian forces fled the Bulgarian forces and were able to occupy Bitola. After the breakthrough of Thessaloniki Front, in which the Iron Regiment took an active part, the regiment named after Prince Mikhailo took part in the battles for the liberation of Nis, Aleksinats, Razhani, Svilaynats, Grotsk, where he was transferred through the Danube and through Pancevo, to continue the liberation of Beccherek, modern Zrenyanin. On 7 on November 1918, the regiment liberated Kikinda. In mid-December 1918, the Iron Regiment was withdrawn from Vojvodina to Belgrade.
      During the First and Second Balkan Wars, the Iron Regiment consisted of the order of 19 - 20 of thousands of soldiers.
      Until May 5 1920, the Iron Regiment remained in Belgrade as a guard unit, serving in the Palace, Parliament and Ministry of Serbia. Only then the regiment was demobilized and few of the surviving soldiers who had been fighting at the front since the 1912 of the year were able to return to their homeland, burned and devastated by the Bulgarian occupation. Later, the Iron Regiment became part of the Serbian Guard.
      The total losses of the regiment in the battles of 1912 - 1918 were about 32 officers, 1239 soldiers and non-commissioned officers killed and 148 officers, 6492 soldiers and non-commissioned officers wounded. Only those soldiers who suffered from enemy bullets are counted here. Losses from illnesses, especially from cholera of 1913 and typhus of 1915, are not included in these figures.

      The regiment's special pride is that the coffin with the remains of Peter I Karageorgievich was wrapped in the banner of the Iron Regiment. A note about the soldiers of this regiment remained in the Tribune de Geneve:
      It seems that they are fighting in hypnosis, in some kind of lethargic dream, they go forward like somnambulists ... Constant attacks, surprisingly, like intoxicants, go forward day after day, like a storm moving forward on 30 - 40 miles per day.

      Also François d'Espere, a French general, wrote about the soldiers of the Iron Regiment:
      These are the villagers, almost everything; they are Serbs, cruel in suffering, sober, modest, untouchable; these are people who are free, proud of their race and the owner (owner) of their fields.

      The heroism of this regiment is evidenced by the fact that 250 soldiers of the 2-th Infantry Regiment named after Prince Mikhailo were awarded the Order of the Star of Karageorgia with swords, the highest military award of the Kingdom of Serbia. Among them were the aforementioned Milunka Savic and Flora Sands.
  9. kazak52
    kazak52 29 July 2014 21: 42
    Very interesting article) good
  10. pinecone
    pinecone 29 July 2014 22: 39
    2 questions to our friend from Bulgaria:
    1. How can we explain the fact that June 29, 1913 Bulgaria was the first to strike Serbia, thus unleashing the Second Balkan War.
    2. Is it possible to consider the Macedonian language as an independent language, or is it just a dialect of Bulgarian.
    Thank you in advance for your reply.
    1. pytar
      pytar 29 July 2014 23: 39
      Here we write a few Bulgarians, so I did not understand to whom of us the question, but I will tell you my opinion :))))))))
      1. I think there were several reasons for such a decision to the Bulgarian monarch, Tsar Ferdinant. The first reason - the underestimation of their strength. And one can say the opposite - the correct assessment is that Bulgaria will not have enough strength to reclaim the busy Serbs and Greeks of Macedonia, into a new long-lasting war. We thought that with a few sudden blows, they would be able to overcome them separately and fleetingly, that KSAT with the Greeks succeeded. Almost the entire Greek army was surrounded. On this assumption there are many reasons. The Bulgarian army was severely exhausted and drained of blood / almost every 3 soldier was killed or wounded /! Tsar Ferdidant calculated that it was not possible to wait until the Greeks, the Serbs and the Romanians adjoining them were left alone. In addition, peace was not concluded with Turkey, which began to transfer reinforcements. The second reason - Emotional tension in the result is unfair according to the opinion of the Bulgarians, the actions of Serbia and Greece in Macedonia. During the first Balkan war against Turkey, Bulgaria fielded almost half of all Allied forces! Against the Bulgarian army fought up to 80% of all Turkish forces in the Balkans. The Bulgarian army, smashing the Turks, reached 40 km from Constantinople, bearing the heaviest losses. At that time, our allies, quietly and without encountering any strong Turkish resistance, occupied almost all of Macedonia. Ever since the entry of the Greek and Serbian troops in Macedonia began the persecution of the Bulgarian population. It then constituted the absolute majority of these territories. It can be said that Bulgaria fought a war with the main goal - for freedom and reunification with our sonographers from Macedonia! There was no limit to the Bulgarian indignation when, after so much shed blood, Macedonia was already occupied by our former allies! Keep in mind that the majority of the male population of Macedonia, even finding Turkish slavery, became part of the Bulgarian army or fought as a local militia against the Turks! It fought against the new occupiers - the Greeks and Serbs! After the Ilinden Transfiguration of the East in 2012 hundreds of thousands of Macedonians fled to Bulgaria from the Turkish atrocities. Their descendants still live with us. I am here where I live nearby there are dozens of villages with Bulgarians from Macedonia. This gives the answer to your second question! There is no such thing as "Macedonian nation" and "Macedonian language". Not in Greece or Serbia, they fled from the Turks. After the defeat in the Second Balkan War, thousands of refugees left for Bulgaria. Their ethnic identity was thousands of years old, it was Bulgarian, and many of our outstanding personalities came from Macedonia. Macedonian language, as such, is the artistic creation of Serbomans. Initially, from all Bulgarian dialects, Macedonian was itself removed, but even though it was not unique. After the occupation of Macedonia, the policy of genocide and the forced assimilation of the Bulgarian Macedonians was pursued in the Greek part. As a result, they consider themselves Greeks to themselves, even though they know and speak a dialect. In Serbia, more precisely, in Yugoslavia, a policy on Serbization was initially carried out, but since it did not give the result, it was decided to make non-Bulgarians from the Macedonian Bulgarians. They showed up for a special non-Bulgarian nation. Serbisms were forcibly introduced into the language and a new fantastic "Macedonian" story was invented. Very similar to the Ukrainians, is not it? The current Macedonians believe that they are unique people, the direct descendants of Alexander of Macedon. They 100 years instilled in the Bulgarians are some Tatars and enemies. This, in connection with the lack of contacts between these two parts of our people, gave the result. Though... Time is everything in its place. After all, the Macedonian churches and stone insignia with firewood, clearly writes who they are and who were their kings! People in Macedonia begin to realize for Malenko as Bulgarians.
    2. Bagatur
      Bagatur 30 July 2014 10: 59
      It is not for nothing that June 16, 1913 is called "den of criminal madness"! Despite all the provocations, Serbia and Greece must not go crazy and think soberly! Our Orthodox "brothers" -19 May 1913 they secretly concluded from Bulgaria a treaty for a joint war against her if she continues to insist on observing the treaty since 1912 ... Serbia in fact abandoned the dispute with Bulgaria on the borders in Macedonia, the so-called. "indisputable zone" which the Bulgarian country should give it! Russia which should face Nicholas II, the stat referee was supported by Serbia, the ambassador to Belgrade-Hartwig had a lot of hands on this! Ferdinand should not start a war, but ... A huge part of the population should also count, more than 10% of the officers and 1/3 of the VERY COMMANDWONE FROM MACEDONIA. There was a lot of pressure to protect compatriots! If Russia has left the Balkans razratsa then it is possible and Bulgaria vygrpat, but .... consideration in the genus Serbia against Austria-Hungary, we need not left hope for UTB! The Russian country left Ruman misfortune and from this moment the fact that Bulgaria will not be an ally of Russia in a big war became 90% likely! Austria-Hungary also played an important role, after all, Ambassador Tarnovsky assured of support, in fact they wanted to defeat Bulgaria that then easily attract the country on yourself ...
  11. pinecone
    pinecone 30 July 2014 07: 14
    Thanks for the reply.
    But whether the Bulgarians should unite with the people diluted by Albanian Muslims is a big question. Bulgaria has enough of its problems with the Turks and Pomaks, living and rapidly breeding in your country.
    1. Bagatur
      Bagatur 30 July 2014 10: 41
      It is important for us to stop the Bulgarian policy pursued by the ruling elite! Stop reprisals against people who speak the truth and do not recognize this creation of the Comintern and Serbian chauvinism - "Macedonian people" !!! The Albanians themselves do not mind, they laugh at this imaginary isdtoria !! as they say, after a bath from a Macedonian gets a real Bulgarians))) Unfortunately, demographically, the Macedonian exponents are depressingly Albanians have 7-8 children and they will take over this country with the most pleasant things ... As they say, "we will win with a chicken kegi" I think I understand? Another 30 years Albanians will be at least 40-50% of the population do not need to explain what will happen then-Kosovo in the eye! If there is some kind of obedience, then the exchange of populations and territories will be desperate, otherwise for us it will be lost for what they are doing! But we also cannot agree that the border with Macedonia will become the border with Great Albania! Even if they split up and keep what remains of Macedonia as a buffer state between us and Albania, it's also a good option! Otherwise, the time will come and we will be trapped in the Islamic Kavkan - to the west of Albania, to the east of Turkey!
    2. pytar
      pytar 30 July 2014 12: 51
      "But whether the Bulgarians should unite with the people diluted by Albanian Muslims is a big question."
      The people of Macedonia are not another people. We are one people. And not only Albanians, but also Serbs make fun of those "Macedonians" who are defined as the "Macedonian nation". Our unification with Macedonia is usually inevitable. As noted by {Bagatur}, the exchange of territory with Albania will solve many problems and make it possible to avoid conflicts. A huge problem for both Macedonia and Bulgaria is the demographic disaster. Albanians, Turks, Gypsies multiply at an explosive rate, and the Slavs are hidden in our eyes. The unification of the Macedonian and Mizian Bulgarians, with the subsequent confederation of the Serbs and Montenegrins, will make it possible to consolidate and restore the population. The salvation will take place in the unification of all Slavic resources on the Balkans, on the basis of ethnic closeness and common Orthodox Vyara.
  12. trilips
    trilips 30 July 2014 10: 01
    Dear Bagatur
    I would like to remind you of the atrocities of the Bulgarians during P.M. Voyni in the territory of southeast Serbia when the Yugoslav Army fled to Corf through the mountains of Albany together with the king and the entire fighting population and these 3 years 1914-1917 the Bulgarians committed the terrible genocide of the Serbian population which constituted some helpless men women and children. What Bulgarian people did with ordinary people does not lend itself to any comprehension. They burned men and women alive, cut babies in half, nailed them to the gates, cut off the boys' fingers, burned the stigmas on their faces. And this cruelty spread over all the remaining inhabitants of the south of Serbia and such mockery is not attributed even by the Nazis. So you don’t need to depict saints from the Bulgarians, you can dig through the network and find enough information on that topic
    1. Bagatur
      Bagatur 30 July 2014 10: 30
      Dear friend!

      As we say in Bulgaria, what they wanted and got! After the violence of the Serbian army, on the Bulgarians in Macedonia, what should be expected? People did not want to beat "rule the Serbs" for that and cut them ... Now they looked at the Ukraine-Russians and they do not want to beat them there! I regretted that I had a quarrel with the Serbs, but ... it didn't happen by chance! Everything that happened in WWI and 1941-1944 is a consequence of the Serbian policy towards the Bulgarian population of Macedonia! They could not make them "rule Serbs" - in 1944, with the support of Stalin and the Comintern, they thought of the "Macedonian people" ...))) How could the Serbian occupation fought, in 1934 the Bulgarians from Macedonia, a member of the VMRO (Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization), finished off King Alexander Karageorgevich in Marsellon paid for the tears of Bulgarian mothers in Macedonia! I recommend reading "War Returns" from Henri Pozi! The Frenchman fought together with the Serbs against us on the Macedonian front. In the 30s he was in Ocupyrana from the Serbian Macedonia "Vardar Banovina" as they called it then. And after that he refused the Serbian orders and wrote this book to the Serbian authorities and their crimes! Everything is said there, and no need to surprise you with hatred of Serbs ...
      1. trilips
        trilips 30 July 2014 10: 40
        I see you have a ready answer "what they wanted and got" but how can you justify cooperation between Bulgaria and the Nazis in WWII and NATO support in 1999 - ??
        1. Bagatur
          Bagatur 30 July 2014 11: 27
          And how to explain the Molotov-Ribentrop Pact? Not cooperated with Hitler, or what? I know your answer, time, etc. Good? If Russia is interested, you can agree with the Nazis, but not Bulgaria?

          Bulgaria became part of the axis 1 MARCH 1941, not after June 22, they say, do not blame us in the alliance with Germany against the USSR! We are at war with Germany, and most importantly, together with Yugoslavia and Greece, it was bezmisleno-except for destruction and occupation we will get nothing! And the Balkan Orthodox brothers will help after their crime against the Bulgarian population in Macedonia, it's too much ... There was such a moment in 1940 when the USSR offered us additional goods in exchange for Soviet troops in Varna, Burgas, Shumen and Yambol ... in fact, occupation and Sovietization ! After what happened in the Baltic States and Finland, it's hard to imagine that Tsar Boris III would agree to this! The whole war, the Soviet ambassador sat in Sofia, the fact that Bulgaria is an ally of Germany is not a problem for him ... It was our ambassador in Moscow-Stamenov, Stalin, who offered to cooperate for peace with Germany and he gave such an answer-Russia can probably retreat until the Urals, but everything will win! But when the Red Army came to the borders and it was necessary to put on power "their people" the Bulgarian communists declared to us Stalin war on September 5.09.1944, 1999! And in XNUMX, what should they do? Stand up the foremost half of the world at the head of the United States ... for God's sake, Russia has been doing this time? A march from Bosnia to Prishina and ... they all surrendered! Why did you help the Serb? Except some rock groups, I did not notice any kind of support, After all, Russia itself then with B.N. and Kozirev did not rush into battle ... We regretfully do not have strategic nuclear forces and the wealth of Siberia .. The most interesting is when Serbia, in the name of EU membership, will be supported by a different policy than you want ... I wonder why Serbia is a member of the Eurasian Union do not invite, the answer will be very interesting to me ...
          1. trilips
            trilips 30 July 2014 19: 58
            I eat to compare the relations between Bulgaria and Serbia, since you are neighbors and also Orthodox, and Russia is far from Serbia geographic and I don’t support either side, I eat to compare the facts and relations between Serbia and Bulgaria - who is to marry and who is right, time will tell, but the mood of the Serbian population negative towards Bulgaria. Since Bulgaria showed mainly imperial ambitions towards Serbia and not vice versa, and for their implementation under the guise of using friendship with the Germans in two wars. Of course, after 1999, we did NOT support Serbia, but turned to Western values ​​and the Western "democratic" way of life. This is where Bulgaria is now, we all know - to say that you are the poorest country in the European Union. So, according to your theory, "You got what you wanted too." I am not mean and I have facts just like you
            1. Bagatur
              Bagatur 31 July 2014 16: 12
              Thousands of Bulgarians fought for Serbia in the uprising of 1804, notwithstanding the Haitud Velko commander of more than 5 fighters, Petr Ichko, a native of Kotel, negotiated with the Blistatelnaya port on behalf of Karageorgevich ... for gratitude, he ordered him to be ousted; Bulgarian volunteers of the so-called I legia fought the Turkish garrison in Belgrade in 000, the Bulgarians fought in the Serbian army against the Turks in 1861; but I don’t know, and one Serb fought when nibud for Bulgaria ... they attacked us after the reunification of the Principality of Bulgaria and the so-called Eastern Rumelia (southern Bulgaria) ... Of the 1876 Bulgarians in Macedonia 700-000, more than 1919 were killed, 1941 20 went through prison and concentration camps just because they do not want to beat "rule the Serbs"! After 000 Yugoslavia began to create a "Macedonian nation", this is all exactly Russian in Ukraine will be called whatever you like and will announce that no other people !!! Even the Turks did not agree to this, but they recognized the Bulgarians as a people, had their own schools and churches! The Serbian "brothers of the Slavs" came in 150 and the first thing they did was expelled the Bulgarian teachers and churchmen and the people declared Serbian-ktzh no honor-fighting in the face and shooting !!! When the Bulgarians complained about the Russian consul in Skopje: Why is this doing to us? Do not you see what kind?, Received in response-I know what kind, the will of the sovereign-emperor Nicholas, that they became Serbs! Here's an Orthodox brotherhood! Unconditional support Russia is what Serbia relied on in its impudence and anti-Bulgarian policy ... Such facts, the fact that they do not like anyone else, is another matter ... The fact that democracy did not work for us is not to blame, but it is not our fault that our corrupt politicians pocket look! By the way, I just can't understand what are your values? Bulgaria with Germany and against Russia .. well, Russia chose Serbia for itself and supported against us, should she thank her for this?
    2. pytar
      pytar 30 July 2014 13: 07
      You know, there is a lot of speculation about the "atrocities" of the Bulgarian army in the southeast of Serbia! You can't talk about "terrible genocide" and the like, simply because there was no such thing! There was violence and even then a lot. Nobody justifies the cruelty against the civilian population! But I personally know - my grandfather fought then and was there at that time! He talked about what the Serbs did with the captured Bulgarian soldiers and how the Bulgarians, seeing this animal cruelty, performed with hatred of the enemy. In Macedonia, the Serbs slaughtered entire villages and exterminated everyone who had at least something Bulgarian in their blood! Priests, teachers, ordinary villagers ... No comparison can be tolerated by what the Bulgarians did with the Serbs in revenge for what the Serbs did against the Bulgarians before! Dig as much as you like on the net ... On the net you can find all sorts of charges on all sorts of topics! War is always fierce and every atrocity evokes the same in response! I think that we Serbs do not have any insoluble problems in reality. For all there are external ill-intentioned forces. Until recently, it was very difficult for us to find a common language with the Serbian leaders. But after the defeat and suffering suffered by the Serbs in the past 20 years, Serbia has matured and is beginning to look differently at the Bulgarian-Serbian relations. Having recovered from their extreme nationalism and chauvinism, the Serbs are beginning to realize that they should not be hostile from the very closest neighboring people. I think he and I have very good common perspectives ahead of us, and a cross has been put once and for all on the past!
      1. trilips
        trilips 30 July 2014 20: 01
        What kind of Serbian nationalism are you talking about - and what did you do with the Bulgarian Turks by the end of the 80s - is that not nationalism ??? !!!
        1. pytar
          pytar 30 July 2014 23: 36
          And what have we done with the Turks? Apparently you know better, even though I live here and was a direct witness to these events! And the very concept of nationalism, do you know what it embraces? Reading that short line that you wrote, I can say that you are absolutely not aware of the so-called. "Revival process", which the communist authorities in Bulgaria tried to carry out in the 80s. I can tell you in great detail all the circumstances, preconditions and what actually happened. But honestly ... hardly worth it, since the topic is different.
  13. pytar
    pytar 30 July 2014 13: 24
    I would like to add something else about the NATO war against Yugoslavia during the Kosovar events. At this time Bulgaria was already a member of NATO, and one of the most pro-Western governments was in power with Ivan Kostov. At the same time, the nationalist Yugoslav government of Slobodan Milosevic continued to pursue a policy of pressure and infringement of the rights of the Bulgarian national minority in the Western outskirts. And despite this, Bulgaria has taken a position on strict neutrality. We did not allow NATO to use our territory and airspace for the needs of the operation against Yugoslavia. Of course, Russia was not allowed, similarly to such actions. Unofficially, the Bulgarian authorities turned a blind eye to the imposed economic embargo over Yugoslavia and trade across the border was in full swing. In addition, quite a few Bulgarian volunteers went over to the aid of the Yugoslav units, across the same border. The Bulgarian people were unequivocally on the side of Yugoslavia against NATO. Our pro-NATO government could not help scolding this fact, and for that it limited itself to a formal and purely declarative reinforcement of NATO forces. It is interesting to note that all of our official propaganda has been limited to criticism against the "totalitarian communist regime of Milosevic" and not against Serbian nationalism. Those. ideological schemes were used, and not such on an ethnical basis. This is for the reason that the Bulgarians have long ceased to have ethnic hatred against the Serbs.
    1. stoqn477
      stoqn477 30 July 2014 14: 00
      I want to add something else, about the NATO war against Yugoslavia, during the Kosovar events. At that time, Bulgaria was already a member of NATO, and the government was one of the most pro-Western provinces in the head with Ivan Kostov.

      At that time, Bulgaria was not yet in NATO. Ivan Kostov, wanted to appeal to the Americans and distance himself from Russia.
      My personal opinion is that many Bulgarians morally supported the Serbs in this war.
      1. pytar
        pytar 30 July 2014 15: 19
        My sins. Nastya taka Beshe position. Yes
    2. trilips
      trilips 30 July 2014 20: 07
      Why are you demonizing Milosevic so much - the people of Serbia may not have loved him but respected him for not giving Serbia to be torn to pieces by the western jackals as your state.
      The proof of this is the fact that in Belgrade in 2001 or I don’t remember, in broad daylight the Prime Minister of Serbia Z was killed in Belgrade, Djindjic who sold Milosevic to the West and still has not been found. You Demonize the Serbian people, I will survive as well as it and demonized the west from the beginning of 2002 of them. BUT know the truth, anyway, sooner or later it will come to the surface
      1. pytar
        pytar 30 July 2014 22: 44
        If Esli took my words like that, I obviously didn’t express it. I do not in the least way demonize Milosevic. But his policies and activities, in any case, can be ambiguously assessed. For its effectiveness, it can be judged by the results. No matter how you look at them, they are catastrophic. Serbia was torn apart and suffered great territorial and human losses. This is a tragedy for the entire southern Slavs. Of course, Milosevic was a patriot of his country, but he also showed extreme nationalism, which always gives bad results. I also want to make it very clear that I do not feel any hostility towards the Serbs! On the contrary! I consider them, our closest people are kindred and I believe that the time will come when we will leave with him. We here speak purely informatively in historical terms, but there is not so simple. I have no thought or intention to demonize the Serbs!
      2. pytar
        pytar 31 July 2014 00: 00
        trilips, I have here with you, a dialogue has formed. I do not want to offend you, but it seems to me that you perceive things a little biased. When the socialist camp collapsed, America's plan came into play for the complete neutralization of Russian influence in the Balkans. According to the current results of this plan, one can also say this: "utilization of the Orthodox Slavs". There are two large Slavic fools for such disposal - Bulgarian and Serbian. Before the national elites of these two countries, the West has set conditions - your peoples will be exterminated / economic, demographic and other types of genocide /. This is not subject to the bazaar. You have a choice! Or you will contribute to this process and in return you will be able to enrich yourself. Your family, interest, property and money will be guaranteed! Or you will resist, which is meaningless and will lead to bloodshed, in which you yourself will personally suffer! In addition, we guarantee the country's territorial integrity for a fairly long time. For Bulgaria, for such an impact, it was planned to use that large Turkish and Mohamedan minority that lives in the country. It was supposed to start fermentation, turmoil, bloodshed, and as a result Turkey would receive a pretext to enter Bulgaria and crush the country. Without an alliance with the USSR, Bulgaria could not defend a nationally oriented position. Our political elite / he is generally the same former communist / never suffered from excessive patriotism. And he betrayed the country. There were no wars and bombings, but the result was like after the war. In Yugoslavia, the opposite is true! The Serbian political elite, due to his nationalism-patriotism, decided to resist. The country drowned in decades of war. Tens of thousands of people have died. Indescribable tragedies ensued. One way or another, without the support of the USSR or Russia, Serbia was doomed and lost a lot of territory. It is not my business to judge who is right, who chickened out, who did the right thing. Just looking at the facts. For that we need a strong Russia! In addition, Russia has the necessary allies that it can resist. During the existence of the Warsaw Pact organization, no one could touch either us or the USSR. A new commonality is needed in the economic, cultural and military attitude. It will happen sooner or later. Do not doubt!
        1. trilips
          trilips 1 August 2014 11: 12
          Dear opponents
          You bring me some single facts in the authenticity of which I have no doubt. Serbia and Bulgaria also hit a lot of negative and positive moments - and I compare the well-known facts that people remember and the history knows, and they cast a shadow on little-known stories (which certainly deserve attention), but they did not affect the vector so much directions of war. And yet, I will repeat these facts to you again:
          1 - The contradictions after the PBB (where Bulgaria wanted to chop off the largest part of the territories) grew into the BBB, in which Serbia, Greece, Romania, the Ottoman Empire and Montenegro opposed Bulgaria as a united front. Of course, the coalition defeated Bulgaria’s growing appetites.
          2 - Bulgaria entered WWI on October 14, 1915 on the side of the Central Powers, declaring war on Serbia. Bulgarian troops participated in operations against Serbia and Romania, fought on the Thessaloniki front. During the war, Bulgarian troops captured most of the territory of Serbia, Romania and Greece. In 1919, the Neuilly Treaty was concluded, according to which Bulgaria, as the party that lost the war, should have beaten back the occupied territories.
          Naturally, after your defeat in 2 wars, a fire of revanchism towards neighboring states that still hasn’t died out - I especially emphasize the anti-Serb position, which is subtly permeated in most of your comments.
          And this revanchism has drawn you into joining the side of the fascists in World War II.
          3 - And already in December 1941 Bulgaria officially entered WWII on the side of the Axis countries (Germany, Italy, Japan). Yes, "insight" of course came in September 1944 after numerous defeats of the German army, and Bulgaria switched to the side of the Red Army.
          4 - And again you entered into a coalition with the new fascists in 1999, when Bulgaria granted its airspace, and the heavy bombardment of southern Serbia began, by airplanes from fascist bases in Turkey.
          Of course, I do not blame the entire Bulgarian people as malicious enemies of humanity, but these are facts that you cannot deny, and all little-known details did not have much influence on the course of the war
          I am not going to argue with you and convince you of what you do not want to believe in. You are narrowly connected to your national framework and this is your and not only your misfortune. Nationalism is a dangerous disease and what consequences it has, we all know especially with WWII and now the consequences of this disease, today we see in Ukraine. And only multinational states, where tolerance is cultivated and mutual understanding exists between different peoples, nations and religions, are more likely to prosper (by the way, Yugoslavia also beat a multinational state where there was no violation of the rights of ethnic minorities).
          I expressed my point of view, and you cannot convince me that you are the best nation in the Balkans, and all your neighbors, people of the lower grade. Also, I have no intention of imposing my point of view on you or other visitors to the site. I voiced it, someone likes her, maybe someone doesn't like her, this is a personal matter for each of us. But there is a lot of literature and who wants to know the truth, he will still know it without your disputes and proofs with me.
          All the best
          1. pytar
            pytar 1 August 2014 20: 57
            Yeah ... I read your letter here and I'm surprised! Written how to say ...?! We say "put the talig in front of the horse"! :)))))
            "I expressed my point of view and you cannot convince me that you
            the best nation in the Balkans, and all your neighbors, the people of the lowest grade "- well what can I add here ?! You are talking to yourself! "The best nation in the Balkans" ?! All the Balkan nations, very similar to one another, despite their different ethnic origins! This is due to centuries-old close contact and common historical past. After all, all the Balkan nations, though not equally long, but still for a long time, were ruled by the Turks. This mental similarity, I can accurately observe, because I have the opportunity to visit all our neighbors and everywhere I have acquaintances and friends. We are in many ways similar, but with the Serbs at the greatest level! Believe me, Bulgarians do not feel the slightest a feeling of superiority over the rest of the peoples of the Balkans. It hardly makes sense to answer you with such a way of thinking. And yet it teased me how you interpret things. And deduce the facts from the context of the more fraudulent
            events and processes. And they, you know, have their own logic and reasons!
            1.PBV - "... where Bulgaria wanted to chop off the largest part of the territory .." - the largest territory? Yes! But for the whole territory from the early Middle Ages and thousands of years, the Bulgarian ethnic group has already compactly lived! By the beginning of the twentieth century, the Bulgarian people were the most numerous on the Bolkans and occupied the largest territory! We call this "Bulgarian land"! That someone else's "chop off" we wanted? Nothing! You are here .. excuse me ... but it’s full of delirium! Don't argue, but take it and look at the map! There is the answer to everything
            questions! There are Turkish maps, European where you can clearly see what territory the Bulgarians lived in different centuries! We didn’t have any appetites for the lands of others. We wanted to cheat ours.
            2.PMV - you also have some kind of compote with facts and left-handed conclusions! Bulgaria with the same sacred goal - to liberate the occupied Bulgarian territories and its population, entered the war against Greece, Serbia and Romania! And the three eti states held considerable Bulgarian territories under occupation. We are not guilty that Russia, following its own interests, has strengthened our enemies! Not against Russia, we wanted to fight, but for our own! Russia can be understood. Greece Serbia, Romania, weigh much more together than Bulgaria, which, moreover, recently
            lost to second bv. You see ... In all the wars after 1978, Bulgaria did not have claims on the territory that were inhabited from other nations. And it was not part of the occupation of foreign territories. Map look, damn it! The Bulgarian troops rarely went to more distant frontiers in etih wars, solely from a military point of view, without a claim for occupation! They would release their tribesmen, this is revanchism ??? And when Serbia and Greece hold them under occupation and exterminates for the fact that they are Bulgarians, this is fair! Well ... I can not agree with you! No By the same logic, the USSR should not have been liberated, Western Ukraine and
            Belarus, and many more regions inhabited by Russian or kindred peoples. Do you, as a Russian, know what the patriotic war means? Here for us the WWI was domestic! You probably do not understand the power of how one war for someone else can be domestic if it is being waged against Russian allies! Who has a narrow circuit ???
  14. pytar
    pytar 1 August 2014 21: 00
    3.VMV- very controversial and ambiguous period! Relaxed and unarmed
    a country that recently emerged from the chains of the Treaty of Noah. The German invincible until that moment, the army is in full combat readiness on the Danube! First of all, Germany defeated all of Europe for zero time! 20, the young Yugoslavia fell in a month! Ksati fell so quickly and because the non-Serb soldiers did not want to fight for Serbia! On the Germans, they were viewed as liberators, from Serbian rule. The German Coburg dynasty has been standing on the Bulgarian throne for 30 for years. Ksati Russia put them on the Bulgarian throne along with Germany! So what? Should Bulgaria fight against Germany? Impossible! D and why? Germans want to go through Bulgaria to defeat our Bolkan enemies! I think the choice is simple. They entered into the triple pact, even though Tsar Boris had contrived, to give the Germans less than they would have taken if they occupied the country! Bulgaria did not declare war on the USSR! I didn’t send troops on the fronts, even though the pressure was very strong! I saved, saved the lives of Bulgarian Jews, for that I went to Israel with respect for us. The Bulgarian troops took all the same Bulgarian territories in which our Bulgarians lived! In 1944, after changing the situation, declared war on Germany and sent 3 armies / 400 troops / against the Nazis! They fought really, gave a lot of sacrifice! Bulgaria’s praise was highly appreciated by Stalin and, in gratitude, he saved the country from its neighbors ’claim to even territorial reparations!
    Bulgaria in the continuation of 50 years, was the most faithful ally of the Soviet Union! We have never had Soviet troops, like Hungary or Czechoslovakia there GDR and so on. Because, they trusted us and knew that we were with you! The Bulgarians never rebelled against the USSR, because we are fraternal peoples! Remember how many countries have retired from the Soviet bloc or got up! China / 61 /, Albania, Hungary / 58 /, Eastern. Germany, Poland / 80-tion /, Czechoslovakia / 68 /, Romania with Baushestku, and the same Titovaya Yugoslavia, which often led the anti-Soviet policy! Yes, we in the People's Republic of Bulgaria had 3 army! 1-th against Turkey, 2-paradise against Greece and 3-th against Yugoslavia! The USSR then really looks at Yugoslavia as a possible adversary!
    4. You really did not read what I wrote up? I will not repeat. You can read if you have the desire, and if not, your business.
    I am ready to accept every valid other people's opinion! And I apologize if
    wrong! And you have one cure without any sense! Okay...
    Good luck to you too. And with such detractors, we will not quarrel with Russia. Time
    works for the benefit of the union of Slavic countries! Vanga said - "Bulgaria is strangling, and Russia is languid. Those two save the world!" I hope so! SORRY FOR LONG POST! RUSSIA AND BULGARIA - two SISTERS!