On the readiness of the Russian Empire for the First World War

Although the big war was discussed in Europe all the time, but its beginning caused horror even among many leading politicians. So, having received a message about mobilization in the Russian Empire, the German Kaiser Wilhelm II at first even fell into a panic: “The world will overwhelm the most terrible of all wars, which will result in the defeat of Germany. England France and Russia conspire to destroy us. ” Germany and Austria-Hungary wanted to solve the case without a general war, and the entry of Russia and England into the war dramatically changed the situation.

4 September 1914 The Entente countries in London decided not to conclude a separate peace and conclude a closer military alliance. It should be noted that at the beginning of the war a wave of patriotism and nationalism swept all the powers. British historian G. Craig noted: “It was an extraordinary mix of unrealized patriotism, romantic joy about the possibility of participating in a great adventure, a naive expectation that this conflict would resolve all previous problems in one way or another.” Most Germans, French, British and Russians believed that their country was the victim of brutal external aggression. The general formula was the expression "we did not want this, but now" we must defend our fatherland. " At the beginning of the war there was a national consolidation.

After all, only a few guessed that war would bring terrible destruction, a sharp drop in living standards, that millions of people would die. The majority, including the leaders of the states, believed that the war would be short and would end in a beautiful victory. The image of a knightly, “beautiful” war with a multi-colored uniform and gentleman officers prevailed.

With the beginning of the war in the ruling class of the Russian Empire, the English and Frenchophiles absolutely prevailed. A relatively small group of those who were considered Germanophiles found themselves on the sidelines of public life. At court, the empress Alexandra Feodorovna, the former princess of Hesse-Darmstadt, who was the cousin of the German emperor, was considered a supporter of peace with Germany. In the Duma and the State Council, right-wing leaders (the so-called “Black Hundreds”) acted for good relations with Germany. Among them were Prince Meshchersky, Minister Shcheglovitov, Baron Rosen, deputies Purishkevich and Markov. It should be noted that the extreme right were the most far-sighted leaders of the Russian Empire, warning the government from the start of the war with Germany. Among those sympathizing with them were Peter Nikolayevich Durnovo, who warned sovereign Nicholas II against speaking out against Germany, predicting a social revolution and the collapse of both monarchical Russia and Germany.

In February 1914, Durnovo gave the king an analytical note. In it, the former Minister of the Interior quite accurately predicted the composition of the two opposing coalitions, noted that the Russian Empire would get the brunt of the war and the role of a "battering ram penetrating the thickest German defense." Durnovo spoke of Russia's unpreparedness for war, that war "cannot be a triumphal march to Berlin." In the event of a defeat in the war, he predicted falling into "a hopeless anarchy, the outcome of which is difficult to foresee." The army, which will be deprived of the most reliable personnel of its composition, will not be able to stop the unrest, moreover, it will itself become the social base for the revolution. Durnovo predicted the collapse of the liberal opposition (the future Provisional Government). He noted that the opposition is intelligent in its composition and divorced from the people, therefore in the event of a revolution it will quickly lose control of the situation. A similar fate threatened Germany. In essence, Durnovo gave a gloomy, but piercingly correct analysis of the future of the Russian and German empires.

However, Durnovo and other right-wing figures were not honored in the Russian Empire. They could only sound the alarm and experience its fall with the Motherland. In general, the ruling circles and the liberal intelligentsia embraced anti-German sentiment. They were very stable. The leaders of the liberals Guchkov and Milyukov, even in 1917, when the disastrous war became clear to many people, continued to defend the idea of ​​“war to the bitter end”. The western party in Russia supported the common goal of the Entente - the need to weaken "German imperialism." Russia was obliged to fulfill allied obligations to France. At the same time, it was believed that Germany plans to tear away from Russia the Baltic states, Finland, the Black Sea region, including the Crimea, that Berlin and Vienna will establish their rule in the Balkans and the torrential zone (Bosporus and Dardanelles). Although the far-reaching and expansionist plans in Germany were finally established only during the war.

The fallacy of the pro-Western course was also manifested in the Polish question. 13 August 1914. Tsar Nicholas II decided to grant Poland wide autonomy. Although it was obvious that during the war one should not go for liberal experiments. Britain and France welcomed this step, which is not surprising, since they had long used the Poles to fight the Russian Empire. Western ambassadors spoke to Foreign Minister Sazonov about strengthening the forces of Russia, about uniting two Slavic peoples under the scepter of the Romanovs, but almost immediately the Poles began to be used against the empire. In Germany, the Poles remained loyal to the Kaiser. And in Austria-Hungary, in August Joseph Pilsudski began the formation of the Polish Legion, which was led by the Higher National Committee in Krakow. The Polish Legion was preparing for a march on Warsaw. Already in September, the Russian High Command highlighted the participation of Poles living in the Russian part of Poland on the side of the Germans and Austrians.

And the creation of a special Czechoslovak formation in Russia eventually turned out to be sideways. The Czechoslovak Legion (later the corps) played a leading role in fomenting the Civil War in Russia. Czechoslovak troops in Russia became a kind of "fifth column", which was used by external forces (the trap of power).

Ship with Russian soldiers arriving in Marseille


In France, revanchism and the doctrine of “war to the extreme” prevailed. The French General Staff dismissed all defenders from the army. The French planned to attack. The French charter of 1913 began with the following postulate: "The French army, returning to its tradition, does not recognize any other law than the law of the offensive." The seizure of a strategic initiative, the unshakable will in the pursuit of a decisive battle, the inexhaustible vitality - became the main princes of the French army. The Higher Military Academy, headed by General Foch, cost all plans on the basis of the principle: “the will to win is the first condition for victory”. Three generations of French people believed in a brilliant victory, after which France would return Alsace and Lorraine (lost in the 1870-1871 war) and restore the leading role of Paris in Western Europe. Further events will show how blind the French military and politicians were. One will to win was not enough to break the German war machine.

Colonial troops from French Indochina land at Camp Saint-Raphael


The initial entry into the war of Russia and Britain caused a shock in Berlin. Many hoped that Russia would choose Kutuzov’s strategy in 1812 of the year - waiting for an invasion, and a retreat deep into the territory. This allowed us to solve the question of France, and then turn all forces against Russia. And the ambiguous policy of London misled the German leadership. The pause in the British diplomatic game 1 of August 1914 in Berlin was perceived as Britain’s desire to maintain neutrality. The German emperor exclaimed: “Now we can start a war only with Russia! We will simply send our entire army to the East! ”True, the enthusiasm was not long, they were replaced by disappointment.

Deceived expectations caused hatred. In Germany, the flow of hatred has spread widely, primarily to two countries - England and Russia. Germany could still avoid a terrible war on two fronts, if she had shown wisdom and initiated the negotiation process. However, aggressiveness and belligerence prevailed, Berlin did not want to appear weak.

Anglomania of a significant part of the German elite played a cruel joke with Berlin. The Germans misjudged the aspirations of England. The German ambassador in London, Likhnovsky, earnestly adopted all English. He was followed in Berlin. All the top spoke in English in the German capital, starting with Chancellor Betman-Golwega and Admiral Tirpitz. Many prominent statesmen were married to Englishwomen. Many Germans believed that the two peoples of the Germanic root should be united and rule the world. For them, the British Empire was a role model. The same disease will deal a fatal blow to Hitler's Third Reich.

The Kaiser and his entourage misunderstood the general line of British politics that London’s goal is the absence of a single dominant force in Europe. The head of the English headquarters college, General Wilson, was friends with the head of the Higher Military School of France, General Foch, and with his colleagues traveled by bicycle on the French-German border. Wilson clearly defined the direction of the main attack of the German army - the coverage of the French troops on the right flank. Already in the spring of 1914, the creation of the Franco-British plan for the start of hostilities was completed. He was known to all 10 officers. England planned to mobilize on the same day as France and immediately send an expeditionary force (6 divisions) to the front.

German infantrymen send machine guns to Russians from a trench on the Vistula River, in 1916

Russia's readiness for war

In Paris and London, they looked at the power of Russia with admiration and fear and planned to fight with Germany “until the last Russian soldier”. Sir Edward Gray wrote in 1914: "Russian resources are so great that eventually Germany will be depleted by Russia, even without our help."

Already in August 1914, the Russian Empire put up 114 ready for battle divisions, France had 62 divisions, Britain inserted 6 divisions. The German Empire put out 78 divisions at the beginning of the war (soon bringing their number to 96), and Austria-Hungary 49 divisions.

In 1910, army reform began: the mobilization period was shortened, the technical condition, and the organization of reserves improved. The call is now carried out strictly according to the territorial principle. The reduction of the garrison troops gave 6 additional divisions. They increased the number of the officer corps, improved the power and uniform of the soldiers. The army was “purged”: 341 general and 400 colonels were resigned. This partially eradicated the "Manchu syndrome" - the demoralizing memory of the defeat in the Russian-Japanese war.

In general, the army was significantly strengthened. The patriotism of the army and the people at the beginning of the war was very high. For military needs sent large funds. Russia after Tsushima again became a great naval power. So, if the German naval program in 1907 - 1908. cost 14 million pounds sterling, then the Russian program of the same period was estimated at 14 million pounds sterling. Naval construction 1913-1914's. It cost Germany 23 million pounds, and the simultaneous Russian shipbuilding was equal to 24 million pounds sterling. This was possible due to the general economic growth of the Russian empire: government revenues between 1900 and 1914 over the years doubled and reached 3,5 billion rubles. The reforms of Stolypin (one of the most ardent opponents of the confrontation with Germany) had a positive effect on the country's economy. In the west of the Russian Empire, strategic railroads were built, which allowed the transfer of 100 divisions to the front within 18 days. As a result, Russia lagged behind Germany in full combat readiness by only three days. The soldiers received new (brown-green) tunic and were armed with a 7,62 mm five-shot rifle (Mosin rifle, three-line ruler). Field artillery complied with the best international standards.

On the readiness of the Russian Empire for the First World War

Descent battleship "Poltava" on the water. The second ship (according to the date of launching) in a series of four dreadnoughts like "Sevastopol"

However, the army had a number of weaknesses, which will clearly manifest itself in the course of the war. High command, as during the Russo-Japanese war, to a large extent, did not correspond to the positions held. It was not the winning army of Rumyantsev and Suvorov. The war did not give birth to military geniuses of their level. "Peacetime generals" could not lead the army and the empire to victory. Moreover, part of the generals will support the conspiracy, which will lead to a coup in February 1917.

The army lacked officers, and the officer corps became more and more peasant-raznochinsky. Nobles have ceased to be the basis of the officer corps. In 1900-1914 Two thirds of the officers in the rank of second lieutenant to colonel came from commoners, Cossacks or peasants. Aristocrats retained the leading position only in the cavalry. Before the war, the officer corps was generally loyal to the imperial throne. But the war knocked out the cadre composition of the officer corps, the intellectuals-raznochintsy, who stood on liberal-democratic, socialist or nationalist positions, became mass officers. As a result, the army from the main support of the throne has become one of the main destabilizing factors.

The war will stop or extremely slow down Russia's internal reform, which could save the empire. While the war was on, it was impossible to complete the land reform, radically improve the situation of the workers, introduce universal primary education, etc. Various radical forces took advantage of this. And when the first patriotic euphoria ends, deep protest will accumulate in the society.

The Russian army was a powerful force, but it never reached a level comparable to the level of the main enemy - the German one. In Russia, it was not possible to create such a headquarters, which would not be a simple department of the military ministry, but a think tank of the army and the empire. No one denied the Russian soldier courage and perseverance, but the vast human resources were often used by the command ineptly. An inefficient organization during the war revealed shortcomings in literally everything - in the production and supply of weapons, ammunition, communications equipment and medicines. The ineffective management of the railways during the war led to the fact that the roads were packed with trains, and they could not bring ammunition and provisions to the front in time.

Brave, but illiterate Russian soldier, poorly guided by the terrain, difficult to master the technique. Foreign observers noted poor intelligence, neglect of disguise, lack of initiative and lack of capable generals, infinitely weak organization of troops and logistics, communications, lack of telephone communication.

In Russia, there was no main condition necessary for war in the industrial age - honest and competent economic planning. Theft reigned in the rear, incompetence, and often sabotage. Non-military industries collapsed rather quickly, embittering the rapidly impoverished population of the country. The lack of manufactured goods deprived the peasants of an incentive, and they rather quickly began to hold onto food (the surplus was introduced in the Russian Empire, not the Bolsheviks). Carelessly mobilized skilled workers, which deprived the industry of valuable personnel.

Hope for foreign aid did not materialize, the army did not have enough heavy guns, machine guns and aircraft. So, the whole Russian army had heavy artillery 60 batteries, and the German one had 381 batteries. In July, the 1914 of the year on more than 1 thousand soldiers accounted for the entire 1 machine gun, which already during the Russian-Japanese war showed its terrible effectiveness. Only in July, 1915, after terrible defeats, the Russian command will order 100 thousand automatic rifles and 30 thousand new machine guns. At the beginning of the war, Russian industry produced on average 165 machine guns per month. Russian enterprises could produce only a third of the automatic weaponsneeded by the army. The rest was bought in France, England and the USA. But first of all they supplied their armies, to Russia they supplied the weapon on the residual principle. In addition, various types of machine guns, as well as purchased rifles, required their own caliber of cartridge, which made it difficult to supply the troops. The situation with artillery ammunition was even worse: more than 37 million shells - two out of every three used, were brought from England, France, the USA and Japan.

In general, Russia (and its opponents) was not ready for a long war. The opposing sides were convinced of the transient nature of the war - they thought of fighting for two months, not more. On this prewar reserves enough. Russia did not fully use the Japanese lesson in order to re-equip the army, begin industrialization, create a powerful military-industrial complex. The Russian army was sufficient for the defense of the empire, but could not compare in technical and organizational terms with its main enemy - the German army. The courage of the Russian soldier could not compensate for the incompetence of the military command and the military-technical gap.

The call of reservists in St. Petersburg. 1914 year
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

101 comment
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    4 August 2014 07: 41
    The article is good, there are a lot of facts. We are starting to slowly introduce into the minds of people about that time, about those who died during the First World War.
    Eternal Memory to Heroes!
    1. +10
      4 August 2014 07: 44
      Hmm ... And as always, the instigators aside ... !!!
      1. +7
        4 August 2014 07: 53
        I agree with you. And besides, today it is in the forefront against Russia.
      2. +11
        4 August 2014 09: 29
        Quote: Armagedon
        Hmm ... And as always, the instigators aside ... !!!

        As usual, the war was needed most of all by amateurs, England and the gaining weight of the USA. Reason to sell weapons and other resources.
        The war was least needed by Russia, and oddly enough by Germany.
        Unfortunately, our last king turned out to be a fool and a weakling, unlike his great and far-sighted father, and allowed us to be embroiled in this adventure.
        Not understanding their economic and political problems, not defeating the internal enemy, they started a war with the external enemy. As a result, the last tsar accomplished the impossible, which no external enemy had succeeded before, would be thrown onto reefs and drown the ship of Russian statehood.
        Very well, this situation is described in the books: Bushkov. Red Emperor, Old Man. Who killed Russia.
        1. +4
          4 August 2014 16: 10
          Quote: volot-voin
          Not understanding their economic and political problems, not defeating the internal enemy, they started a war with the external enemy. As a result, the last tsar accomplished the impossible, which no external enemy had succeeded before, would be thrown onto reefs and drown the ship of Russian statehood.

          You have very well listed the problems facing the king-father. Does nothing remind you of the list of problems voiced by you?
        2. +1
          5 August 2014 17: 48
          great and far-sighted father

          This most "great and far-sighted" emperor watched peacefully while Austria-Hungary strengthened its influence in the Balkans, knocking out one ally after another from Russia.
          At the same time, he sincerely believed that since we "freed the brothers from the Ottomans", they will repay us with sincerity and friendship.
          Apparently he didn’t have enough power to detach, but Bulgaria somehow left under the auto-Germans, the Allies needed to send troops to Greece already during the WWII, so that the local German-dominating dynasty would not side with the Triple Alliance.
          As a result, only friends of Serbia and Montenegro remained friends with Russia.

          So ...
          It was not Nicholas who created the problems that led the people to think of revolution.
          It was his "wise" fathers and great-grandfathers who pursued such a short-sighted policy that even the elite at a decisive moment in history simply betrayed their descendant, the "sovereign leader."
    2. +3
      5 August 2014 17: 58
      165 machine guns per month

      Hahaha Hey monarchists anti-advisers, where are you?

      But what about Govorukhin's whining about "Russia which we have lost"?

      "The clink of champagne and the crunch of French rolls," you say?

      Yeah, yeah, ladies and gentlemen.
  2. +1
    4 August 2014 08: 00
    No matter how ready the Russians are for war, our most important weapon is that we are Russians. No one has such a spirit as ours. This mystery of the Russian soul was feared and will be feared. Glory of the Great Russian Empire!
    1. Turik
      4 August 2014 10: 57
      It looks like a call to fight only with meat. In the First World War, and so it happened with the country - they rushed a whirlpool without knowing the ford, according to the principle "The little soldiers will endure everything, cook porridge from the ax, and the battleship will sink with ingenuity ...". Without industry, with a weak railway connection, with a large, but ill-prepared fleet for those realities ..... The result is known.

      In World War II, it was no longer the case, even though a bunch of equipment and weapons were lost at the beginning of the war, but almost six months or a year made up for almost everything that was lost, and even more than that.

      The will, technology and industrial resources must harmoniously complement each other.
      Of course, you can fight with one thing, but victory will not work.
      1. anna_kru
        5 August 2014 22: 41
        It would not be World War I would not have to accept the Great Patriotic War on its territory. There was no need to create an enemy for the sake of England and France. If you look at the photo documents and compare the Russian and German soldiers of the First World War, it becomes obvious that the Russian soldier underfed with a height of 147 cm in any situation was doomed to death and not to victory. And over whom and for what?
  3. +10
    4 August 2014 08: 08
    On August 13, 1914, Tsar Nicholas II decided to grant Poland wide autonomy.
    Grandfather, Alexander II was smarter ... When the French asked him to grant "freedom" to Poland, he replied that he did not mind, but let the Austrians and Germans do the same ...
  4. +8
    4 August 2014 08: 28
    At that time, little depended on the Empire. In general, the First World War was imposed on Russia by the Entente. Russia did not need this war; it did not have colonies in Africa. hi
  5. +4
    4 August 2014 08: 31
    Well, according to his favorite topic, the Russian Expeditionary Force in France
    1. -2
      4 August 2014 23: 12
      Quote: Landwarrior
      Russian Expeditionary Force in France

      Betrayed and almost completely destroyed by the "allies". These soldiers and officers honestly performed their duty, while in their homeland the liberal clique was striving for power in 1917, and then gave weapons to the German-English fosterlings - the Bolsheviks.
      1. 0
        5 August 2014 08: 57
        Quote: Blackgrifon
        These soldiers and officers honestly did their duty.

        Yes, it's not for nothing that they were also called the "Honor Corps". After the Tsar's abdication, they wrapped the cockades on their caps with black cloth as a sign of mourning.
        not everyone returned home, but those who returned also did not escape the meat grinder of the Civil War. They fought on both sides. However, this is just not surprising. hi
        1. +1
          5 August 2014 16: 43
          Not in its composition Malinovsky fought?
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. 0
            5 August 2014 21: 46
            Yes, here is his photo of those years
      2. +4
        5 August 2014 21: 14
        Are the Bolsheviks fosterlings of the German-English "team"? I wonder who then the Germans and the British were diligently trying to destroy and tear apart? Remind me about the intervention?
        Lenin used the situation to come to power in full, which had developed by the year 17, unlike the others.
        In a strong and healthy state, revolution is IMPOSSIBLE.
        1. 0
          5 August 2014 21: 25
          Quote: Jager
          Remind me of intervention?

          Recall the conquest of India by the British?

          Quote: Jager
          Lenin used the situation to come to power in full, which had developed by the year 17, unlike the others.

          And then he began to scatter territories like rubbish. And the procedure of what you call "coming to power" could take place only after Kerensky provided the Bolsheviks with weapons to create brigades in order to counter the military. And Kerensky himself got hold of power only thanks to a coup. By the way, all these perturbations began exactly as the defeat and economic collapse of Germany, the main adversary of the Entente, flashed on the horizon.
          In addition, Lenin NEVER denied that he received money from hostile intelligence. Moreover - he was proud of it.
          1. anna_kru
            5 August 2014 23: 08
            And why should Russia have been pleased with the "economic collapse of Germany - the main opponents of the Entente"? Whereas a huge number of Russian-speaking Germans traditionally lived in Russia - they built, treated, wrote textbooks. Look at the textbooks of the St. Petersburg Academy - the creators of these books were by no means Montferand or Dumas.
        2. -1
          5 August 2014 21: 36
          Quote: Jager
          In a strong and healthy state, revolution is IMPOSSIBLE.

          If. At that time, technologies for manipulating public opinion had already appeared.
          As for health, an absolutely healthy state is impossible in principle. There is always corruption, there is always crime, there are always corrupt representatives of law enforcement agencies, there are always incompetent fools in the ranks. That is life.
          And intervention is a special issue. The Germans tried, but they simply did not have enough strength. As for the British, I doubt very much that if Britain, France and the United States had piled on with the whole united army, then the USSR would have had a chance to fight back. But for some reason they didn't pile up. If we recall how many Bolsheviks of the "Leninist Guard" were shot by Stalin for treason, then everything becomes very simple and clear. Another interesting fact - in the West, they generally hate not Lenin and Trotsky, but Stalin.
      3. anna_kru
        5 August 2014 22: 56
        As for the "fosterlings" - Lenin stopped this senseless urapotriotic massacre. You forget that not only officers are fighting. Yes, and sorry for the officers. If Russia did not get out of the war, it would lose its independence. Allies would have devoured both Russia and Germany. See how strong the ties between Russia and Germany were. Textbooks, almost all technical, construction, medical and other scientific and practical literature were written by Russian-speaking Germans. Generations have learned from these books. For some reason, no one remembers this.
  6. +4
    4 August 2014 08: 42
    Finally, we will learn about the First World War, how long our historians were silent about this war ...
    1. +4
      4 August 2014 08: 49
      Not that they were silent ... They just did not pay due attention hi
      1. igor.oldtiger
        4 August 2014 09: 14
        do we know a lot about the Great Patriotic War? already and so and so redraw over the past 20-30 years!
      2. +1
        4 August 2014 13: 45
        Yes, do not forget or hush up. And there were books and movies,
        just World War I was "closed" by the civil war with an emphasis on the victory of the Reds, and for the sake of preserving the regime they went to a separate peace with the German bloc. It was not profitable to talk about the war and its results.
        1. dmb
          4 August 2014 14: 13
          Old songs about the main thing. "The Reds went to a separate peace for the sake of maintaining the regime." And if they had not gone to a separate peace, what regime was established in Russia? Obviously German, occupational, with the rejection of not only Ukraine, but also the region of the Don Army and the Caucasus at least. Somehow it does not fit well with patriotism. “It was not profitable to talk about the war and its results.” You contradict yourself because you immediately talk about books and films. Another question is that the war itself and its results were assessed differently than the current government does, well, it’s not a fact that the current government is telling the truth, and the "Reds" are not. In any case, the people followed the Bolsheviks precisely because they promised peace and land.
          1. +2
            4 August 2014 23: 45
            Quote: dmb
            what regime was established in Russia

            Not German - that's for sure. Germany was on its last legs, and the entry of fresh US forces into the war guaranteed the victory of the Entente.
            1. dmb
              5 August 2014 09: 15
              Before writing, you should probably at least familiarize yourself with the maps of that time. I'm not talking about history. Well, what lands "on its last legs" Germany occupied by the Entente together with the United States? But Germany had already occupied Ukraine, Mr. Krasnov was already jumping up and down in his desire to see the Germans on the Don. So it is precisely the German occupation. Or do you think that the Entente would rush to liberate our land from the Germans?
              1. 0
                5 August 2014 16: 10
                It's not about the maps, but about the resources to continue the war.
                The Entente did not seek to occupy Germany. - they took all their colonies from the Germans and imposed huge reparations. And they would not allow the Germans to annex the rich territories of Russia. Simply put, "square" would have appeared several decades earlier.
                1. +1
                  5 August 2014 21: 24
                  Even at the expense of these very lands, the Germans would have "left". Regarding the "nezalezhnaya" - not for several decades, but for a couple of years.
                  1. 0
                    5 August 2014 21: 45
                    Quote: Jager
                    the Germans would have "left"

                    Would you leave like that?
                    Having received the food? Yes, this would ease the situation of Germany, but not critical.
                    By mobilizing the local population? A certain amount would have gone, but the majority immediately rebelled and the Germans would have to fight the rebels.
                    The annexation of territories and their integration into their state are two different things. The Germans simply would not have time to integrate new areas in a couple of months.
                    Quote: Jager
                    not for several decades, but for a couple of years

                    Not understood. Ukraine as an "independent" state appeared after the collapse of the USSR, and this is the end of the 20th century. If then these territories were cut off from the USSR, the Entente would quickly recognize their independence, and this is the beginning of the 20th century.
                2. anna_kru
                  5 August 2014 23: 39
                  "And they would not allow the Germans to annex the rich territories of Russia." Of course, they would add them to themselves. And why did Germany have to do this? In Russia, so they studied and built according to German textbooks.
                  How many German immigrants in Russia do you know? By the way, they did not attach anything to themselves, on the contrary, they were given inconvenience for development in risky farming zones. I must say that the Germans coped with this well, built brick factories and cheese factories.
              2. anna_kru
                5 August 2014 23: 31
                The lands of Germany were indeed torn away in favor of France and Poland. The aftermath of the war was the worst economic crisis in Germany.
            2. 0
              5 August 2014 21: 21
              And who then occupied almost the whole of Ukraine and reached Pskov? Americans with the British? Of course, in the West, Germany at the end of the war suffered one defeat after another, unlike the Russian front.
              The Entente won, so what? "Allies" immediately rushed into the intervention.
              By the year 17, the Empire was bleeding, the meat grinder grind it. It was not so much the Bolsheviks who were to blame (the parties were the sea), but their own intelligentsia and the stupid Tsar (who possessed truly absolute power, if desired, but he did not have a desire).
          2. anna_kru
            5 August 2014 23: 26
            The decree of both the world and the earth is the first and main legislative document, and not just a promise.
        2. +2
          4 August 2014 15: 03
          And the Reds did not conclude any agreements with the Entente, therefore, peace with Germany cannot be separate.
          By the way, not a single soldier was transferred from the Eastern Front to the Western Front, and even vice versa, therefore, even in this case, Russia pulled out large forces (about a million or even more) of Germans who were never transferred to the West.
          1. 11111mail.ru
            5 August 2014 19: 20
            Quote: Dobrokhod Sergey
            By the way, not a single soldier was transferred from the Eastern Front to the Western Front, and even vice versa ...

            Sorry, you did not specify a time frame, therefore get: the final collapse of our front, caused by the arrest by Kerensky of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief General Kornilov, gave 7 infantry divisions to the French front, and the Bolsheviks came to power - strengthening the Germans in France by 47 infantry divisions. http://www.dk1868.ru/history/zaitsov4.htm
            1. 0
              5 August 2014 21: 28
              You forget how much during this time our milled German divisions. If not for Russia, Deutschland could well now exist in France.
              "Allies" merged Russia. As always. They consider the Empire not to be out of the war (as it actually sounds), but as a LOSER.
              47? It’s a pity that not all.
        3. anna_kru
          5 August 2014 23: 22
          It was not profitable to talk about the war to those who initiated the assassination of Stalin. An interesting fact is that Stalin was killed as soon as a search of Zhukov took place.
      3. anna_kru
        5 August 2014 23: 18
        Perhaps they were still hushed up. Because in this war lies the reasons for the war of 41. If Nicholas II had not betrayed Germany, there would have been no "German aggression" either. Russia and Germany were pitched. As a result, a lot of people were killed on both sides. Who benefited from this? Trophy carrier Zhukov? Who else?
        1. +1
          6 August 2014 06: 00
          And here you are wrong. Not Nicholas II, but the Kaiser initiated the deterioration of relations between our countries.
          1. anna_kru
            6 August 2014 09: 52
            "... having received a message about mobilization in the Russian Empire, the German Kaiser Wilhelm II at first even fell into a panic:" The world will be overwhelmed by the most terrible of all wars, the result of which will be the defeat of Germany. England, France and Russia entered into a conspiracy to destroy us. " Germany and Austria-Hungary wanted to settle the matter without a general war, and the entry of Russia and England into the war dramatically changed the situation. "
            1. 0
              6 August 2014 16: 30
              That's right, but before that he tried hard to spoil relations with Nicholas II.
  7. +3
    4 August 2014 09: 33
    We know very little about this war. Thanks to Pikul, even though the fleet was not forgotten.
  8. +2
    4 August 2014 09: 39
    When you read about the First World War, one gets the impression that this war was wanted by the governments and the military of the leading powers. What were European countries doing before this war for the last 20 years? Armed, created new types of weapons. And someone really wanted to experience all this in practice. Although the Anglo-Boer and Russian-Japanese wars were the harbingers of a new type of war - concentration camps, barbed wire, widespread use of machine guns. But they went far from Europe. And the European military believed that they had stayed too long - armies were sitting in barracks, battleships were "sour" in ports, why not almost cheer up? The last large-scale military conflict was in 1871.
    With great desire, the Serbian crisis could be resolved politically, but apparently no one wanted it.
    1. +1
      4 August 2014 13: 53
      The wars were in Europe and next: two Balkan and Italian-Turkish. But many wanted to prove themselves (money - for officials and business, new ranks and awards - for the army and navy, restoring order - for politicians). that's all and got theirs.
      Officials and businessmen - the loss of power and capital, the military - death and fratricidal war, politicians - the revolution and the change of elites. And now everything seems to be repeating itself again.
    2. anna_kru
      5 August 2014 23: 50
      Of course, the tsarist wars were fought between the members of the English club - after all, they are all relatives. By the way, "God Save the Tsar" is a copy of "God Save the Queen". In England there was a cruel punishment for the stubborn beggars and in Russia serfdom.
  9. +3
    4 August 2014 09: 50
    After all, only a few guessed that the war would bring terrible destruction, a sharp drop in the standard of living, that millions of people would die. Most, including state leaders, believed that the war would be short-lived and end in a beautiful victory. The image of a knightly, “beautiful” war with a multi-colored uniform and gentleman officers still prevailed
    How similar to today's situation with the desire of many to send troops to Ukraine.
  10. +1
    4 August 2014 11: 14
    A small clarification - the aristocrats did not maintain their leading position in the cavalry (how many aristocrats were in general before the war in the Cossack units and army cavalry), we can only talk about the guards, which also suffered serious losses. The caste structure of the officer corps was preserved only in the navy - the losses here were much less than in the ground forces, the intensity of hostilities even in the Baltic, not to mention the Black Sea, was an order of magnitude lower than on land ...
    1. anna_kru
      6 August 2014 00: 00
      Oh yes, this caste composition skillfully distributed dents to the sailors and forbade them to go above the waterline during the sailing season, and this was a very long time. Not surprisingly, the sailors hated the caste itself.
      Regarding the privileges of the guards and how this affected official relations, one can read in Denikin's diaries.
  11. +5
    4 August 2014 11: 38
    Only in July 1915, after terrible defeats, the Russian command will order 100 thousand automatic rifles ...

    I would like to know what it is about? Fedorov, "Shosha"?

    German infantrymen send machine guns to Russians from a trench on the Vistula River, in 1916

    I thought a lot, considering this map of the front line for 1916. Where were the fighting on the Vistula?

    1. +1
      4 August 2014 12: 28
      Quote: Moore
      I would like to know what it is about? Fedorov, "Shosha"?

      the Russian army was armed with Winchester rifles under a three-line cartridge
      Perhaps I mean the Lewis machine gun
      1. +1
        4 August 2014 18: 44
        Quote: Landwarrior
        machine gun lewis

        he was easily mounted on airplanes .. a light machine gun ... a find for the pilot of that time ...
        But ..import..a rare thing, although I have been in warehouses.
        1. +2
          4 August 2014 20: 33
          Quote: Cristall
          import .. a rare thing though in warehouses visited.

          well, we must start with the fact that in the Russian army in general a lot of what was rare, and the weapons were very colorful.
          Take the rifles. In addition to the "three-line" (not only Russian, but also of American production) - already described by me "Winchester" (yes, the same Henry system, so familiar from Westerns) under a three-line cartridge, "Lebel", "Enfield", "Arisaka" (Yes, bought from the Japanese + trophies RYAV).
          There were not enough nagans, new officers on the Caucasian front were awarded with "Colts" ...
          Vooschem, in all this kotovasia it remained unclear - how did it happen that when the factories were idle, the army's reserves were then enough for several years of the Civil War, although there were frequent cases of "cartridge famine" at the front ... Sabotage? request
          1. +2
            4 August 2014 23: 47
            Quote: Landwarrior

            The highest generals were almost completely messed up in high treason. Sabotage.
            1. +1
              5 August 2014 21: 50
              Quote: Dart2027
              The highest generals were almost completely messed up in high treason. Sabotage.

              Apparently it is. No wonder the Emperor wrote in his diary:
              "Around betrayal, cowardice and deceit ..."
    2. 0
      4 August 2014 14: 09
      Quote: Moore
      Only in July 1915, after terrible defeats, the Russian command will order 100 thousand automatic rifles ...

      I would like to know what it is about? Fedorov, "Shosha?

      "Handbrake" on those performances: Madsen, Shosh, Hotchkiss, Lewis.
    3. Artem1967
      4 August 2014 14: 50
      Correctly noticed. Or not Wisla, or the wrong year in the caption under the photo. Active military operations on the Vistula were in the years 1914-1915.
  12. -2
    4 August 2014 14: 12
    Rusichi !!! And what war were we ever ready for ?! Nevertheless, we won. And they fought well, and the victory in World War I has been rightly said to have been stolen recently by people like Lenin (Novodvorskaya 1) who called for the defeat of their own country, that in my opinion, how would you hate power, wish defeat his country already needs to be either a crazy or outright traitor!
    1. 0
      4 August 2014 14: 48
      Recently, a lot of things have been said, but not everything needs to be accepted. Well, how did they steal the victory from us?
    2. +6
      4 August 2014 15: 49
      Lenin did not call for the defeat of the Fatherland, but for the defeat of the government, and more precisely, the defeat of the governments of all countries. It’s like according to Saltykov-Shchedrin, many tend to confuse the concepts of Fatherland and Your Excellency. And thank God that the Bolsheviks ended this senseless massacre for Russia, which could not be got involved at all. Here Nicholas II and his government convey thanks for the collapse of the empire. Before reproaching Lenin and the Bolsheviks, tell me, why did Russia enter this war? How much I read, I have not found an intelligible answer to the question.
      1. -1
        4 August 2014 18: 18
        Lenin is a political prostitute who has been offering herself and her party from the first days of the war .... Everyone in Europe squeamishly waved him off until he was needed for both sides of this massacre to withdraw Russia from the war and therefore not to fulfill the agreements ... Only this conclusion of Russia allowed to prolong the war for another year to obtain additional profits, and Russia to plunge into the abyss of fratricidal war, in the number of victims 2-3 times the loss at the front ... Now that we are being stifled with sanctions, when in the Black Sea the foreign warships that Turkey passes, creating a threat to us, and at the same time restricting the exit of our ships, all these are the consequences of that treacherous policy of Lenin and his entourage, who arrived both from a German sealed wagon and from a ship from America ...
        1. +2
          5 August 2014 21: 37
          Father, you didn’t hit your head? You look at the map of the USSR sample of 1946. Take a look. Again. Think about it. And ask yourself - but didn’t I write nonsense in the post above?
          Our current situation is the result of the actions of Grbi and three drunks in Belovezhskaya Pushcha. No need to smear Ilyich. NOBODY found for him a dime in foreign accounts, and the Germans tried very hard - the Nazis hated the Communists fiercely and frantically.
          1. +1
            6 August 2014 00: 19
            The Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, were in such a hurry to make peace with the Germans (obviously in order to free up forces for an internal war with the Russian people) that they gave all the territories at the first demand --- the Baltic states, Ukraine (they also gave the present Novorossia with the Rostov region, although they did not enter in the demands of the German command, but then the Ukrainian nationalists hurried up and presented a map of the previous administrative-territorial division, and the Bolsheviks agreed to take it off). they even gave those regions to Armenia, which had been part of the Russian Empire for decades (even after the very substantial assistance of Soviet Russia in defeating the Anglo-Greek troops, Lenin was thrown to the Turks, without returning the territory or becoming an ally). So if you look at the map of 1946 and 1914 years, you can see how much Russia has lost because of the "fifth column" of traitors and corrupt politicians
        2. anna_kru
          6 August 2014 00: 08
          These are the consequences of Gorbachev's betrayal, and before this Khrushchev, and our stupidity with you. You can not believe Novodvorskaya tales of Lenin.
      2. 0
        4 August 2014 23: 15
        Quote: Rastas
        Lenin did not call for the defeat of the Fatherland, but for the defeat of the government,

        In the same way, our liberals called for defeat during the First and Second Chechen. The traitor received money from the British and Germans, ruined the army, with a stroke of the pen said goodbye to the Baltic states, Ukraine, Belarus, Poland, part of the South. And this is only at the beginning ...
        1. +2
          5 August 2014 00: 43
          Stop talking nonsense. All these myths about German money have long been refuted. Answer the simple question then: how in the conditions of the war with Germany, when operations with the German brand were frozen, did Lenin and his comrades-in-arms manage to cash money and convert them into rubles? And Lenin didn’t ruin any army, but on the contrary, the Worker-Peasant Red Army was created under it !!!!!!!
          1. 0
            5 August 2014 19: 04
            Money was transferred through Sweden. Not in stamps, of course, but
            in rubles, which were then convertible.
            And Lenin wrote detailed reports on what money is being spent on (he didn’t take it for himself!).
            Otherwise, they would stop being translated.
          2. 0
            5 August 2014 21: 27
            Quote: Rastas
            Stop talking nonsense. All these myths about German money have long been refuted.

            Links to the studio, dear. Yes, and I advise you to read Lenin himself and archival materials.
          3. +1
            6 August 2014 00: 34
            And Lenin didn’t ruin any army, but on the contrary, the Worker-Peasant Red Army was created under it !!!!!!! [/ quote]
            Yeah, before the Red Army there was no army at all ... And on what, it is interesting to know, the reserves of this red army fought for another 4 years in the conditions of devastation? But was it that the 1st and 2nd horse armies were mainly created not from horses raised by horse breeders at the request of the imperial military department for the summer offensive of 1917? and also an indicative fact, the TSAR OFFICERS did not carry personal weapons and raised the attack with a personal example (only later acquired trophy weapons), and the red commanders and commissars immediately flaunted with the German Mauser ...
          4. 0
            8 August 2014 19: 20
            What did Lenin not work live on? So he, the venal, first called for the defeat and collapse of the army, and when he got his way to create the Red Army in order to seize power in the feud. A sick person may call for the defeat of the fatherland, government in wartime, and at the same time wish a civil war in order to seize power.
        2. 0
          5 August 2014 17: 20
          The army, as well as the ENTIRE state apparatus, including the dismissal of governor-generals, was collapsed as a result of the actions of the Provisional Government and the Petrosoviet (they sat in neighboring rooms).
        3. anna_kru
          6 August 2014 00: 12
          You match incompatible things. Germany was not part of Russia.
      3. 0
        8 August 2014 19: 16
        It’s thanks to people like you and Lenin who lost, during the war, to call for defeat is a fucking thing ... because when you go against the government in wartime you go against the fatherland, because the revolution sweeps away everything, and not selectively. The war was not meaningless, it opened up great prospects (straits for example).
      4. 0
        8 August 2014 19: 26
        And again, please tell me, what if Lenin would have been in 1941 calling for the defeat of the government in the war? What is it like? But judging by your logic, the bloody massacre would have been stopped, right? So again, to wish the government defeated at such a time is the same as to wish harm to the homeland, since there will be a collapse of the country, and not just government. Once a war has occurred, it must be brought to an end, otherwise devastation, the loss of prestige and the jackals of the world will devour.
    3. Artem1967
      4 August 2014 20: 08
      Compare x.ren with a finger! Have you read even a little Lenin to make such statements? In the situation of the actual collapse of the front, the Bolsheviks had no choice.
      1. +3
        4 August 2014 22: 43
        Among Lenin's works is: "Should we take money from Parvus?" And this is not the same Parvus (Gelfand), who was the personal agent of the head of German military intelligence, Colonel Walter von Nicolai? There is also a note from Parovus to Lenin in the archives, in which he gave recommendations in connection with the upcoming negotiations in Brest. True, Lenin neglected the advice. The agent of influence (of a serious financial British-British group) Trotsky, in the interests of Mericosia, did everything to ruin the negotiations. After all, the war between Germany and Russia exhausted both sides and made it easy prey for her ... Naglo-Saxons.
        1. Artem1967
          5 August 2014 13: 38
          Most likely the one. To make the right decision, you need to know the opinions of all parties. I repeat, but in October 1917 the country no longer had a choice - it was necessary to conclude a shameful separate peace. Lenin's genius is that he foresaw the defeat of Germany in WWII, which automatically annulled the Brest Peace (which unfortunate patriots did not understand, ready to fight to the last Russian soldier).
          1. -1
            6 August 2014 00: 48
            genius or recklessness? Lenin also thought that Finland, the Baltic states, Poland, the city of Ararat would also go back, but no, miscalculated ... Yes, and the world revolution did not take place, which made the construction of communism in one country pointless ... But the conclusion is simple, no need to own statement to help the falling one to fall, it is necessary if you do not help to stay, then at least not put the bandwagon ...
          2. -1
            6 August 2014 06: 03
            Quote: Artem1967
            Lenin's genius is that he foresaw the defeat of Germany in WWII

            That is, it was necessary to stop the war with Germany, which automatically made Russia a loser in the war, because the defeat of Germany was inevitable? What is it like?
          3. 0
            8 August 2014 19: 23
            If it were not for the traitors at the top, as well as revolutionaries of all stripes with their own committees, then Russia would have come out of the war stronger than before, as it happened later and in World War II, so there is a share of the collapse on Lenin as a revolutionary.
            1. 0
              9 August 2014 12: 30
              Quote: AntonR7
              If it were not for the traitors at the top, as well as revolutionaries of all stripes with their own committees, then Russia would have come out of the war stronger than before, as it happened later and in World War II, so there is a share of the collapse on Lenin as a revolutionary.

              totally agree with you
      2. -1
        4 August 2014 23: 17
        Quote: Artem1967
        Compare x.ren with a finger! Have you read even a little Lenin to make such statements? In the situation of the actual collapse of the front, the Bolsheviks had no choice.

        And who provoked this collapse ?! How can we call for the overthrow of power during a difficult war (which was more defensive for us — we didn’t start it)? !! Or can you remind you that during the Russo-Japanese and WWII Bolshevik bombers did not stop, but only increased the terror of the civilian population ?!
        1. +2
          5 August 2014 00: 34
          1) The war Russian troops began with an attack on Prussia. it became defensive after the defeats of 1914/15;
          2) The leaders in terrorist activity were by no means the Bolsheviks, but the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Anarchists. Is Lenin responsible for them too?
          3) the legitimate government was overthrown in February 17, absolutely without the participation of Lenin. There was a typical bourgeois maidan: they clamped the bread, the provocateurs raised the crowd, the leaders intercepted the first person and forced them to renounce under threat.
          for half a year, the economy and the army collapsed to 0 and were dumped in the fall.
          Here is such an effective bourgeois leadership.
          1. -1
            5 August 2014 21: 33
            Quote: GreyJoJo
            1) The war Russian troops began with an attack on Prussia. it became defensive after the defeats of 1914/15;

            Who first declared war to whom? Pay attention - the first were far from Russia.

            Quote: GreyJoJo
            The leaders in terrorist activity were by no means the Bolsheviks, but the Socialist-Revolutionaries and Anarchists. Is Lenin responsible for them too?

            Those. the Bolsheviks did not commit terrorist acts? By the way, Lenin himself was in Switzerland and actively criticized everyone in a row (and was not very eager to make a revolution - in general, he acted like a real liberal).

            Quote: GreyJoJo
            3) the legitimate government was overthrown in February 17, absolutely without the participation of Lenin.

            But I’m not saying that Lenin is to blame for everything and he began everything.
        2. Artem1967
          5 August 2014 13: 49
          The collapse of the army was not provoked by the Bolsheviks, but by the absolute unwillingness of Russia under the "wise" leadership of Nicholas II to wage a protracted war of attrition. The inefficiency of industry, rear services and logistics led to the impossibility of providing the troops with the required amount of heavy weapons, ammunition and advanced models of military equipment (tanks, aircraft, machine guns, large-caliber howitzers). The need to attack with one rifle cannons and machine guns corrupts the army in such a way that the Bolshevik propaganda never dreamed of! All this naturally led to the change of the bankrupt autocracy.
          1. 0
            5 August 2014 21: 42
            Quote: Artem1967
            The collapse of the army was provoked not by the Bolsheviks, but by absolute unpreparedness

            The collapse of the army provoked a coup and the rise to power of the liberal-populist clique, which was later replaced by the Bolsheviks.
            Quote: Artem1967
            The inefficiency of industry, logistics and logistics has led to the inability to provide troops in the right quantity with heavy weapons, ammunition and advanced models of military equipment (tanks, planes, machine guns, howitzers of large calibers).

            1. The Russian army was superior to the German in the number of machine guns (at least there were more of them in the regiment).
            2. Tanks were invented by the British only after the start of a positional war. For a long time we had a more maneuverable war - accordingly, armored cars were actively used, of which there were more than a lot.
            3. Entering the war, Russia had one of the strongest air forces that surpassed the air forces of England and Germany, Austria and Turkey.
            4. The bet on heavy artillery in peacetime was only in Germany, all the rest preferred field art. Last our army was provided.
            5. There was a "shell famine", but not immediately and caused it, among other things, the fact that the army was in the process of reforming.
            Quote: Artem1967
            Need to attack with one rifle guns and machine guns

            The army began to actively create assault units - shock. Preparation was carried out in special centers in the rear.

            Quote: Artem1967
            Bolshevik propaganda never dreamed of

            According to your logic, the army should have dispersed already in 1915. In addition, note that the trench warfare on the Eastern Front began much later than on the Western, and fraternization only after the arrival of the Provisional Rights. In addition, we fought on our own territory - if this is not an argument, then I "wash my hands."
            1. Artem1967
              7 August 2014 11: 04
              Thank you for the reasoned discussion, but I remain in my opinion about the unpreparedness of the country and the army for WWI. It is based on the writings of General Zayonchkovsky, the memoirs of General Denikin, the former Foreign Minister of Izvolsky and the French Ambassador to Russia, the Paleologist.
              1. -1
                7 August 2014 16: 29
                No one disputes that Russia was not ready for war, like the USSR in 1941 ... As now, happen that ... It’s just that the idea should be stuck in every head, no matter how good thoughts are about building a fair society or building democracy can not justify the betrayal of their homeland in times of difficulty or hardship ....
              2. 0
                8 August 2014 19: 33
                All countries experienced difficulties after six months of hostilities, since no one expected the war to drag out, unfortunately, we did not quickly deal with the problems due to which the army outlined here was in the process of reform and should have been ready just around 1917, but when did the enemies wait for the reforms to end? Who benefits from this?
          2. 0
            8 August 2014 19: 28
            Less Soviet textbooks need to be read, read the memoirs of people who lived then and held not the last posts, it will become much clearer.
        3. 11111mail.ru
          5 August 2014 19: 38
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          Bolshevik bombers

          Do not confuse with the Socialist-Revolutionaries?
      3. 0
        5 August 2014 21: 29
        Quote: Artem1967
        the Bolsheviks had no choice.

        Well, of course, to shoot officers and fighters of shock units in the backs and rob everyone who didn’t like their strength, it’s more interesting than fighting for the homeland.
        1. anna_kru
          8 August 2014 00: 01
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          Quote: Artem1967
          the Bolsheviks had no choice.

          Well, of course, to shoot officers and fighters of shock units in the backs and rob everyone who didn’t like their strength, it’s more interesting than fighting for the homeland.

          I had to fight for the Motherland in the 41st on my territory - that's why this is called the Great War Domestic. And in August 1914, two Russian armies of Samsonov and Renenkampf attacked East Prussia from Poland, speaking on the side of the alliance of Russia with England and France against Germany. The Minister of War was Rediger (German) grandfather of the future Patriarch Alexy.
    4. 11111mail.ru
      5 August 2014 19: 34
      Quote: AntonR7
      dinner in World War I, as we have right, they’ve recently been stolen,

      You yourself would sit in the trenches, feed the lice, smell the gas, put dirt in your legs, bury the comrades from your platoon. Then the degree of cheers-patriotism would drop. My grandfather P.M.V. passed from 1914 to 1917 when it was commissioned as non-combatant. Something he was not very willing to talk about that war. He was wounded twice. Last time in the Carpathians explosive bullet in the leg. The best memories are about the second hospital, where the recovering people slept on PURE white linen and were given white bread for tea (not bread!).
      1. 0
        5 August 2014 21: 47
        Quote: 11111mail.ru
        You yourself would sit in the trenches, feed the lice, smell the gas, put dirt in your legs, bury the comrades from your platoon. Then the degree of cheers-patriotism would drop.

        By your logic, there is no need to protect your country and its interests at all. With this logic in Vlasov, some lads during the Second World War were recorded in 90, when the country was falling apart in parts, they traveled to Chechnya and soldiers were urged to surrender.
        As for relatives - and what exactly is the main thing. WHAT years have you been interested in?
        1. 11111mail.ru
          6 August 2014 20: 07
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          According to your logic

          I agree to continue the discussion with you if your statements contain logic about which you are pleased.
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          to protect your country and its interests is not at all necessary.

          Dear, raise your eyelids and read in my commentary that a private of the 192nd Rymnik regiment of the 4th battalion of the 16th company of the 48th division. I give a line from my grandfather's memoirs: "There, in the training team, we sang a song about our regiment:
          "Let us remember, brothers, the battle of Rymnik with a choral song ..." "He went through the whole war, personally took 2 Rusyns and one Austrian prisoner. From the call in 1913 to the call in 1917, he shed blood twice for the Tsar and the Fatherland and was released my father was drafted into the Red Army in 1939, but not into the Kremlin guard regiment, as was supposed to be ordered by the workers of the Blagoveshchensk plant (the son of the prosecutor went), but to the Far East to the Barabash fortified area. And my mother, unlike yours, voluntarily joined the Red Army on October 17, 1941. My parents fulfilled their duties to protect the Socialist Fatherland in full, and I, a major in the Russian Armed Forces, are proud of them.
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          About relatives ...

          In Chechnya, in the city of Grozny, my cousin Marchenko Igor Vladimirovich, a completely civilian man, died around October 1994.
          Quote: Blackgrifon
          .. and what exactly and most important In what years have you been interested?

          On the topic of my comment, I once again urge you to rub your eyes - Where and when did I touch your or your relatives earlier?
          Neither grandfathers nor great-grandfathers, nor my parents dropped the honor and dignity of Russia! I answer.
    5. anna_kru
      6 August 2014 00: 04
      This is what they say "correctly" just sounds from the lips of Novodvorskaya. How easy it is to confuse you!
  13. gdrfedf
    4 August 2014 14: 18
    The security of our personal data is the most important thing on the Internet. But when you find such resources http://yournameinfo.blogspot.ru then you begin to doubt whether there is security and protection on the network? Enter the name, date of birth about the right person and get a complete, up-to-date dossier on him, including data that could not be posted on the network.
    1. Artem1967
      4 August 2014 14: 52
      What is this on the site?
    2. 0
      4 August 2014 22: 45
      Is Moder sleeping? gdrfedf here is a stranger, and not just a stranger, but a very bad stranger. We are waiting for a ban to a stranger.
  14. 0
    4 August 2014 14: 25
    English politics! Alien hands rake in the heat. And the Germans and I twice ran into the same rake.
  15. +2
    4 August 2014 14: 44
    From a moral point of view, Russia was perfectly prepared. The patriotic impulse, as they would say now, went through the roof, which, in general, is peculiar to the Russian people, but such an impulse not supported by great victories will soon fall to the level of discontent and hatred or nonsense, at best. An army that suffers one defeat after another, insufficient ammunition and food demoralize. That basically happened.
  16. +1
    4 August 2014 15: 43
    Those who consider that war a romance, I advise you to read Remarque's book "All Quiet on the Western Front", which depicts all the horror and all the senselessness of that war. A war that was said to be waged for the sake of state interests known only to those in power. Although each government should have one task - to make the life of the people dignified and safe, but these tasks are covered by an abstract idea of ​​state interests, for the sake of which millions of people can be simply destroyed. The First World War was an absolutely senseless war, unnecessary for Russia. You can blame Lenin as much as you like, but no one was able to refute his words that WWI was carried out for money, for the redivision of the world, for resources, for markets, but not for the people. The people provided the role of cannon fodder. Just think, 10 million people died in this war, who could get married, raise children, rejoice, grieve, in general live. But for the oligarchs who unleashed this war, everything in life continued to be wonderful, capital only increased, they themselves did not remain crippled. Paul Vlery: "War is a kind of action, thanks to which people who do not know each other kill for the glory and benefit of people who know each other and do not kill each other."
  17. 0
    4 August 2014 16: 16
    On the site of Yuri Mukhin there is a good article in addition to the one under discussion, called "More about military education and military science." The problems that the army faced on the eve and during the First World War are analyzed, interesting facts are given, I recommend the site: www.ymuhin.ru
  18. 0
    4 August 2014 18: 59
    In general, the militant mood in Europe went through the roof. The media fueled all attacking motives.
    Strange as it may seem, but the Europeans themselves "missed" the war .. because for a long time they had no trouble there.
    But the political and economic rivalry between Germany and England was already leading to a military conflict. And according to experience, England does not go anywhere without France, coincidentally, "offended" alone (without England) by the same Germany ...
    The fact that RI did not need anything was in vain. RI, as usual, needed Constantinople and control over the straits. So much the south gate began to actively participate in world trade!
    Only here with Germany we had no special debate. As if mb would be at war with Austria and Turkey (there is a part of Ukraine there are straits)
    But you never know how to end it all. In 1940, Hitler defeated France and went against the USSR. What guarantee that at 14 Kaiser defeating France and bleeding England (turning it off from the continental race) did not go to RI? Is there a guarantee? There are none of them.
    In my opinion, war was inevitable for everyone. Moreover, RI had the experience of a new generation of war. The invaluable experience of the participant! After all, he could really turn RI into the strongest country on the continent ... but the same problems .. the same rake ...
    1MV is a huge loss and a huge leap in technology .... the old Europe was precisely the first to develop, all because she was often shaken by wars .. bloody ..
    Here's a lesson, hope for God yourself, do not make a mistake !. You can rest as much as you like on the laurels of your ancestors, you can extol as much as you like "we Russians were never ready and always won" - that doesn't make it any better! You need to be ready for anything, but you can't use hats ...
    1. 0
      4 August 2014 23: 40
      But hats - you can’t ...

      You covered the official version and the reasons for WWI, expanding a bit of the history textbook course.
      Indeed, the Empire had the experience of war with Japan. This +
      But there was also a terrible minus-1905. The rebels also had their own experience of "Maidan".
      In my opinion, the war had a solution ... with the victory of one of the parties to the conflict, in any case for the summer-autumn period. I do not think that Kaiser lied ...
      So ... "all parties to the conflict threw their hats and threw them on each other. Why ???
      And so that those who have had the experience of the "Maidan" 1905, there was a chance for a great experiment in Rossii.da forgot to write-bloody.
      And which country has the greatest experience of "Maidan wars" respected Cristall? I think you already know ... Ukraine.
      In fact, one of the superpowers laughing in terms of information laughing
      Yes ... perhaps the Kaiser defeated France in 1914. "I would change my mind" to take Moskvu.A why? Railway \ roads in Russia are few, you understand the costs of shove a bear.
      However, as can be seen in New Russia-Ukraine, it’s not such a superpower ... in the information sense. Although ambitions are like Kaiser’s laughing win until the fall.
      1. 0
        5 August 2014 09: 33
        Quote: Lexi2
        the greatest experience of the "Maidan wars" dear Cristall

        all this "experience" is easy to see through and level out if necessary.
        I do not mix modern Ukraine and RI.
        I believe that RI just had invaluable experience like the REV and the 1st revolution.
        Learn from your mistakes.
        And the Kaiser could lie. They are such politicians ... kinship with Nikolai did not prevent Germany from conducting frankly non-Russian politics.
        As they said in the RIA after the European Congress, Germans have no faith.
        It was the experience of the RYAV that was supposed to secure the Republic of Ingushetia in political steps (reliable allies, not "France and corrupt Germany)
        After Krymskaya, it became generally clear that RI simply and stupidly wants to use everything. Nobody helps .. either by himself (as in Prussia, Austria nifiga does not help only interfere) or sit quietly and develop like China - with a quiet glanders everyone will pass by.
        1. 0
          5 August 2014 17: 41
          The kinship of the ruling dynasties at that time was the norm, the English dynasty even had to change the name.
          Politicians can speak anything, actions speak for themselves. It was not for nothing that Nicholas supported Russia in exactly what the Moroccan crisis was precisely in what Russia needed on both sides.
          England supported Japan, an alliance treaty between England and France. Great allies, right?
  19. Mishanya 84
    4 August 2014 19: 33
    Thanks to the author for the article!
  20. dzau
    4 August 2014 21: 58
    Lost social and economics, not the army. Although, again, who won what there apart from the states that profited from deliveries and loans ...

    On the other hand, the formation of the USSR, precisely as a socio-economic formation, with its educational conveyor of the "Soviet man" (and this most important technology, more important and effective than the notorious "space" and "nuclear" - for who is the rest of the scientific breakthrough in the end carried out?), a planned economy - the language does not dare to call "defeat".

    No matter how praised the pre-revolutionary times now, the inertness and inferiority of the then structure is as obvious as the inferiority of today's stratification in the social sphere, an uncontrolled and dependent economy, personnel shortage (in all spheres) due to the loss of the most important "educational" technologies: i.e. There are “specialists”, but there are few motivated, fanatical in achieving the goal and loyal to the country, because it is difficult to cultivate loyalty to a country where at the top of the pyramid is stupid, fat and venal scum, and social justice is zero.

    The same thing appeared in 1914-1917, moreover, economic backwardness was only the result of a social impasse.

    How not to reap the fruits of the same rake in the near future.

    Thanks to the author for the article.
    1. 0
      4 August 2014 23: 17
      Lost social and economics, not the army. Although, again, who won what other than the states that had profited from deliveries and loans ... But you know that in Germany during World War I there were the best staff officers, the best in the world that the reservists were also well trained
  21. 0
    4 August 2014 23: 14
    Everything was wrong Russia began to mobilize and Germany declared war on it, Russia developed rapidly at that time and the Germans believed that after 5 years the army of the Russian Empire would not be possible to defeat Germany needed this war
  22. +1
    5 August 2014 05: 10
    Quote: ruslan207
    Everything was wrong. Russia began to mobilize and Germany declared war on her ...

    After 50 years, there will also be debate, who first started the Second World War? Either the Poles attacked the peaceful German divisions moving towards Warsaw, or the Russians insidiously took part of the Ukrainian territory from Greater Poland. Although, such disputes are already present.

    In Japan, they were so brainwashed that only one in four schoolchildren knew that Americans dropped atomic bombs on them. The rest believe that they are Russians.

    Soon, Russia will be to blame for all the wars that took place in world history.
  23. 0
    5 August 2014 21: 58
    Sorry forum users hi I will add a little more from myself. Again on my favorite topic "Expeditionary Force in France" ...
  24. +2
    6 August 2014 18: 36
    A little from me - brothers and sister of my grandmother Anastasia. From left to right: Elizaveta Trofimovna Razumovskaya, Vasily Trofimovich Razumovsky and Maxim Trofimovich Razumovsky. 1916.
  25. Rus Communist
    8 August 2014 01: 22
    Well, of course it was the GREAT WAR))) FOR THE BABLE! And for the dough! Here are two parts about 1 Shameful http://vk.com/id80687806?w=wall80687806_21598%2Fall K 100 THE WORLD BATTLE-AUGUST 1 STARTED 2014 How Lenin won Germany in 1918 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v= 0PdkyRCttzU http://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4466892 Why the Reds won http://maxpark.com/user/4295085146/content/1845107 HOW TO HERE PEOPLE http://steampunker.ru/blog/answers /6457.html World War I and Russia http://ttolk.ru/?p=19581 VideoArchive of World War I and Civil in Russia http://vk.com/videos80687806?section=album_404497
  26. 0
    8 August 2014 22: 29
    It seems that the author is a member of the Communist Party. The tsarist government is not capable of anything. So the nifig factories could not cope with their task of providing weapons and other things. Well, still to cope - half of the metallurgical plants went on strike. And mass riots in Kazakhstan and Central Asia in 1915 and especially in 1916 were worth a lot. Remember, of course, that all the copper was mined in Kazakhstan, and cotton and opium (the only pain killer then) in Central Asia? Well, oh well, maybe I vainly reproach the author for bias, maybe.
    But I can’t forgive frank distortion.
    The hope of foreign aid did not materialize, the army lacked heavy guns, machine guns and aircraft. So, the entire Russian army had 60 batteries of heavy artillery, and the German - 381 batteries. In July 1914, more than 1 thousand soldiers had only 1 machine gun, which already during the Russo-Japanese War showed its terrible effectiveness. Only in July 1915, after terrible defeats, the Russian command will order 100 thousand automatic rifles and 30 thousand new machine guns.

    I won’t argue about heavy guns and machine guns, but why are there no details about aircraft? Incidentally, not because there were more of them in the Russian army than in any other? By the way, and conventional guns, too.
    And what kind of automatic guns are these? Maybe all the same rifles? And self-loading, not automatic? And nothing that the only one brought up to the level allowing serial production at that time was the Tokarev rifle? Mondragon rifle in the calculation, I hope we will not take? In general, it somehow turned out ugly, but a good article, in general, is something.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"