Military Review

The myth that Stalin is guilty of the death of the outstanding Soviet commander M. V. Frunze

35
130 years ago, 21 January (2 February) 1885, was born the Soviet statesman and military leader Mikhail V. Frunze. The Soviet statesman and commander gained fame as the winner Kolchak, the Ural Cossacks and Wrangel, the Petliurists and the Makhnovists, the conqueror of Turkestan.


At a crucial turning point stories Soviet Russia, when during the illness and after Lenin's death there was a threat of the seizure of power by Trotsky, behind whom stood the so-called “Golden international” (“financial international”, “world backstage”), Stalin and Frunze seized control over the armed forces. Trotsky had a great influence in the authorities, including the Red Army, was the second leader of the party after Lenin, therefore, as a counterweight to him, he needed to choose a reputable commander, a respected commander. He became the hero of the civil war, a man who protects the genuine interests of the people, Mikhail Frunze.

At the beginning of 1925, Trotsky’s resignation followed. Frunze headed the Revolutionary Military Council, who had fully obeyed Leon Trotsky, became the People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs. His deputy was Stalin's ally Voroshilov. The army as a whole accepted the appointment of M.V. Frunze, and in a short time he carried out a number of transformations, reinforcing unity of command, improving the quality of command personnel and the combat training of troops, removing a significant part of Trotsky's cadres. It is obvious that the armed forces under the leadership of Frunze and then would continue to be strengthened, but his sudden death has deprived the Soviet Union of valuable military and political figure. To blacken Stalin, it created the myth that Stalin ordered the liquidation of Frunze, and that "killed on the operating table" on his orders. Meanwhile, Frunze was completely loyal to Stalin and represented a danger to the aspiring Trotsky-internationalist wing, which still maintained positions in many state and party bodies, including the armed forces (Tukhachevsky and others).

The myth that Stalin is guilty of the death of the outstanding Soviet commander M. V. Frunze

M. V. Frunze. Artist I. Brodsky

Mikhail was born in the city of Pishpek (Bishkek) in the family of paramedic Vasily Mikhailovich Frunze, who served in Turkestan, and Voronezh peasant Sophia Alekseevna. With a gold medal, Mikhail graduated from a gymnasium in Vern. There he first met revolutionary ideas in a self-education circle. In 1904, he entered the St. Petersburg Polytechnic Institute, studied economics. Mikhail was a romantic and idealist, which led him to the ranks of the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP). In 1904, Mr. Michael wrote to his brother: “To get to know the laws governing the course of history in depth, to plunge headlong into reality ... to radically redo everything - that is the purpose of my life.” Young Socialist thought must be "life-changing, that there is no poverty and deprivation at anybody, never ... I'm not looking for an easy life."

Not surprisingly, already in 1905, Mikhail became an active revolutionary, which he combined with patriotism. So, Frunze was not a defeatist during the Russian-Japanese war, like many leading revolutionaries. Michael took part in the 9 demonstration on January 1905 (Bloody Sunday), was injured. He was expelled from the capital, and did not graduate. During the revolution he led the party work in Moscow, Ivanovo-Voznesensk and Shuya, where he was known under the alias "Comrade Arseny". He led the fighting squad of Ivanovo-Voznesensky and Shuya workers by taking part in the December XIUMX armed uprising in Moscow. In the 1905 of being the deputy of the Ivanovo-Voznesensk organization of the district became a member of the RSDLP Congress in Stockholm, where he met with Lenin.

1907 Mr. Michael was arrested and sentenced to 4 years of hard labor. Already being a prisoner, he participated in the attack on a police officer. For attempted murder was twice sentenced to death. But under public pressure, the sentence was commuted and replaced by 6 years of hard labor. Sitting in Vladimir, Nikolaev and Alexander prison, in 1914, he was exiled to perpetual exile in Irkutsk province. In 1915, after being arrested for setting up an organization of exiles, he fled to Chita, then to Moscow. In the 1916, with the fake passport volunteer enlisted in the army, he served in the County organization providing military supplies to the Western Front.

After the February Revolution, Mikhail became the interim chief of police of the All-Russian Zemstvo Union for the Protection of Order in the city of Minsk (March 4 is considered the birthday of the Belarusian police). After that, Frunze held various leadership positions in the party, was the editor of several publications, was engaged in revolutionary agitation among the soldiers.

During the October Revolution took part in the battles in Moscow. After the Bolsheviks seized power, Mikhail Frunze, in whose character creative features prevailed, became an active builder of the Soviet state and the new armed forces. Mikhail was elected to the Constituent Assembly, held a number of senior positions in the Ivanovo-Voznesensk province. From the beginning of 1918, a member of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, in August, 1918 became the military commissar of the Yaroslavl Military District, which included eight provinces. Mikhail took part in the rout of the Left Socialist-Revolutionary insurrection. Mikhail Frunze was supposed to restore the district after the recent uprising in Yaroslavl and quickly form rifle divisions for the Red Army.

So Frunze became a war leader. In this field, Frunze began to cooperate with a member of the First World War, Major General Fedor Novitsky. The former tsarist general for a long time became the main associate of Frunze on the Eastern, Turkestan and Southern fronts. As Novitsky Frunze noted: “... possessed an amazing ability to quickly understand the most complex and new issues for him, separate the essential from the secondary and then distribute the work among the performers according to the abilities of each. He knew how to pick up people, as if by intuition guessing who was capable of what ... ".

Mikhail Frunze did not have theoretical and practical knowledge in the preparation and organization of military operations. However, he appreciated the military professionals, former officers of the tsarist army, united around himself a whole group of experienced general staffers. At the same time, Frunze was an excellent organizer and manager who knew how to organize the work of the headquarters and the rear under difficult conditions, directed the work of military experts, had the charisma of a military leader, followed by soldiers with joy. Frunze possessed a great personal courage and will, he was not afraid to go in the front ranks of the advancing troops with a rifle (in the battles near Ufa in 1919, he contused him). It attracted people to him. Realizing his lack of literacy in military matters, Mikhail was engaged in a lot of self-education (in this he resembled Stalin), carefully studied military literature. All this made Frunze a first-class military leader.

In addition, Frunze was a man of the people, in whom there was no contempt, arrogance, characteristic of Trotsky and the “chosen ones” like him. Nor was he cruel, like the same Trotsky (who in cruelty reached sadism), issued orders about a humane attitude towards prisoners. For this, Mikhail Frunze was loved by the Red Army men and commanders.

Frunze perfectly understood the national interests of Russia. In 1919, Mr. Mikhail Frunze said: “... there, in the camp of our enemies, there can be no national revival of Russia, which is precisely from that side and there can be no question of a struggle for the welfare of the Russian people. Because it is not because of the beautiful eyes that all these Frenchmen, the British, help Denikin and Kolchak — naturally, they pursue their own interests. This fact should be clear enough that Russia is not there, that Russia is with us ... We are not a weakling like Kerensky. We are in a deadly battle. We know that if we are defeated, hundreds of thousands, millions of the best, steadfast and energetic in our country will be exterminated, we know that they will not talk to us, we will only be hanged, and our whole homeland will be drenched in blood. Our country will be enslaved by foreign capital. "

Since January, 1919 has commanded the 4 Army on the Eastern Front. In the shortest possible time, Frunze, with the help of military specialists (as Novitsky was the chief of staff of the 4 Army), converted the semi-partisan detachments into regular units, which carried out successful operations to liberate Uralsk and the Ural Region from the White and Cossack formations. Since March, 1919 Frunze headed the Southern Group of the Eastern Front. The troops of his group in a series of operations defeated the Western army of Admiral Kolchak's troops. In May-June, he led the Turkestan Army, and since July the Eastern Front. The troops of the Red Army under his leadership liberated the Northern and Middle Urals, split the front of the White Army into the northern and southern parts. Since August, 1919 commanded the troops of the Turkestan Front, the Frunze units completed the rout of the southern group of Kolchak's army, then eliminated the Krasnovodsk and Semirechensk groups of white troops. In the course of the Ural-Guryev operation, the troops under the command of Frunze defeated the Ural White-Kazakh Army and the Alash-Horde troops. As a result of the Bukhara operation, the regime of the Bukhara emir was liquidated. Significant successes were in the fight against Basmachis (Islamist gangs). Since September, 1920 has commanded the Southern Front, which completed the rout of the white forces in European Russia. At first, the units of the Southern Front repulsed the white counter-offensive, defeated it in Northern Tavria and liberated the Crimea.

In 1920-1924 Mikhail Frunze was authorized by the Revolutionary Military Council (RVS) in Ukraine, commanded the armed forces of Ukraine and the Crimea, then the troops of the Ukrainian Military District. Supervised the defeat of gangster formations in Ukraine. In battles with the Makhnovists was wounded again. In 1921, he established relations with Turkey, negotiated with Ataturk. For success in the fight against the army Makhno was awarded the second Order of the Red Banner (the first received for success in the fight against the army of Kolchak).

Thus, after the defeat of the White Army and the victory in the Civil War, Mikhail Frunze acquired the status of the winner of Kolchak and Wrangel. He was also the conqueror of Turkestan and the commander who defeated the gangs in Ukraine. This made Frunze one of the leading figures of the young Soviet state.

Since March, 1924. Deputy Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR and the People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs, since April at the same time the Chief of Staff of the Red Army and the Head of the Military Academy Since January, 1925 has headed the Revolutionary Military Council and the People’s Commissariat for Military and Naval Affairs. In the shortest possible time, he carried out military reform, which strengthened the defense capability of the Soviet Union.

Frunze published a number of fundamental works that made a great contribution to the formation and development of Soviet military science, the theory and practice of military art: “United Military Doctrine and the Red Army” (1921), “Regular Army and Militia” (1922), “Military-Political Education Red Army "(1922)," Front and rear in the future war "(1925)," Our military construction and tasks of the Military Scientific Society "(1925). Under Mikhail Vasilyevich, the foundations of military scientific work in the armed forces of the USSR were laid, discussions were held on problems of military construction, and controversial issues of future wars. Based on the analysis of the experience of the First World War and the Civil War, M. V. Frunze considered the future war as a war of machines, but in which man would play the leading role.

Frunze considered the main type of combat to be an offensive, with a large scale and high maneuverability, with operations on the environment where a correctly chosen direction of the main attack and the formation of a powerful strike force played a major role. At the same time, careful preliminary training played a big role. Frunze did not detract from the importance of defense. In its activities, the new People's Commissar paid serious attention to scientific and technological progress and the development of the country's rear. Frunze noted that the Soviet Union should become independent from abroad, not only in industrial activity, but in the design and inventive field.

The future big war fully confirmed the opinion of Frunze - becoming the “war of engines”, where broad offensive operations would play a major role in the successes of both the German Wehrmacht and the Red Army. But the decisive role was played by the human factor, the elimination of illiteracy in the Soviet Union, including mass technical education, allowed Russia-USSR to become the leading world power.


M.V. Frunze in 1920

After the death of 40-year-old Frunze, on the operating table of the Soldatenkovo ​​(Botkin) hospital, with the suggestion of Trotsky and his minions, the myth was immediately launched that the Soviet commander was killed by order of Stalin, who was allegedly afraid of an independent and authoritative military-political leader. In the literary form, this myth is reflected in the work of the writer Boris Pilnyak-Vogau “The Tale of the Unpaid Moon”, where, in the image of the commander Gavrilov, who died during the operation, everyone learned Mikhail Frunze. This literary speculation became almost the main evidence of Stalin’s guilt that Frunze was “stabbed” on the operating table by his order. And in confirmation, the slander of Boris Bazhanov, the former secretary of Stalin who fled to the West, is usually given. Bazhanov said that Stalin killed Frunze in order to put Voroshilov in his place, who was completely loyal to him.

In reality, if Frunze did not accidentally die (this possibility also exists, and a big one: his difficult life undermined his health), then he became a victim of the confrontation between two groups of Bolsheviks - the “internationalists” and the “Bolsheviks” themselves (the future Stalinists). The “internationalists”, led by Trotsky, behind whom stood the “financial international,” advocated using Russia as brushwood to foment a “world revolution” fire. Russia had to die for the sake of building a new world order — a global totalitarian concentration camp with a Marxist slant. Actually, the “Bolshevik-Stalinists” were, in fact, based on national, imperial principles, for the territorial integrity of Russia almost entirely within the borders of the former empire, for the revival of Great Russia on new principles and principles, for building socialism in a single country. This contradiction after the victory in the Civil War, when the problem of whites, nationalists, external invasion and mass banditry (anarchism, anarchy) was resolved, led to the confrontation of two elite groups.

During Lenin's illness and after his death, the matter went to a military coup. Trotsky controlled the armed forces and saw himself in the role of the “Red Bonaparte”. Another candidate for the role of "Bonaparte" was the former protégé of Trotsky - Tukhachevsky. In 1923-1924 the top leadership of the party and the country has accumulated enough reliable information about the unreliability of the top military leadership. One of the closest and open supporters of Trotsky, the Chief of the Political Administration (GlavPUR) of the Red Army, Antonov-Ovseenko 27, December 1923 sent a letter to the Party Central Committee in which he openly threatened the party and state leadership with a military coup in support of Trotsky. There was evidence of a conspiracy in the Caucasian army, which was led by Yegorov. The head of the OGPU Dzerzhinsky at a meeting of the 24 Political Bureau in January 1924 personally reported on a conspiracy in the military sphere, in particular, in the Caucasian army. Active fuss on the Western Front started Tukhachevsky.

It was necessary for the leadership of the country to urgently reshuffle the entire deck of the military elite in order to preserve the chosen course. There was no confidence in their abilities, therefore they did not dare to take more radical steps (according to the Criminal Code). General replacements of commanders began, shuffling was based on the principle of checks and balances, personal hostile relations were also taken into account. First, Trotsky, concerned about the active work of the commander of the Western Front, eliminated the rival Tukhachevsky. He was appointed to the post of Assistant Chief of Staff of the Red Army, depriving him of the commander’s front. In fact, Tukhachevsky, who marked the “Red Bonaparts”, was deprived of his influence on the military and political situation in the country and of his armed forces. At the same time, Tukhachevsky formally remained in the country's highest military elite. After the demonstrative flogging of Tukhachevsky, who dared to go against such a political "heavyweight" as Trotsky, he was retained as an important figure. 18 July 1924. Trotsky appointed Tukhachevsky as Deputy Chief of Staff of the Red Army and, on the same day, as Acting Chief of Staff.

However, Trotsky could not keep the levers of influence in the army. Chairman of the PBC and Commissar for Military and Maritime Affairs Trotsky replaced by Frunze. At the same time, Frunze, which they had never done before, apparently, just in case, retained the command of the Ukrainian military district. Frunze and Trotsky from the time of the Civil War were in hostile relations, which guaranteed his non-participation in the conspiracy. Even during the Civil War, Trotsky tried to eliminate Frunze, blaming him groundlessly for the mass robberies of his troops, Bonapartism, and nearly put him under the terror of the Cheka.

It must be said that in the West they quite clearly understood the meaning of the reshuffle in the top military leadership of the USSR. The British Foreign Ministry wrote that Stalin was turning to politics using “national instruments”. That was true. Frunze was a patriot, a statesman, although he was close to Stalin in everything, with whom he, however, had very good relations.

Frunze immediately reduced the number of armed forces, which during the war increased by more than 5 million. They were cut almost 10 times to 500 with a few thousand people. The administrative apparatus, which was extremely swollen over the years of the leadership of Trotsky, was subjected to a particularly sharp reduction. The central apparatus of the RVS, the People's Commissariat for Military and Naval Affairs and the General Staff were literally stuffed with Trotskyists. They are thoroughly cleaned. Therefore, it is not surprising that Frunze, in the summer and autumn of 1925, “hit” three times in car accidents.

Interestingly, Frunze sought the appointment of another deputy, the hero of the Civil War, Grigory Kotovsky. Kotovsky had fought side by side with Stalin and Budenny since the time of the Soviet-Polish war. Thus, there has been a course towards the creation of a patriotic military leadership of the USSR represented by Frunze, Voroshilov, Budyonny and Kotovsky. All of them were strong, strong-willed commanders and patriots of Russia-USSR. All, albeit to varying degrees, were “on a short leg” with Stalin. No wonder Kotovsky was shot on 6 in August of 1925 by assassin Meyer Seider.

It is quite possible that Frunze was also eliminated by Trotsky’s “order”. Too many, he interfered. Finally, eliminating the "fifth column" in the country and the army could only in 1930-s, already in the pre-war situation.


Mv Frunze takes parade of troops on Red Square. 1925
Author:
35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Nayhas
    Nayhas 2 February 2015 06: 40 New
    -21
    The myth that Stalin is guilty of the death of the outstanding Soviet commander M. V. Frunze

    What was he outstanding? Here is the discovery ...
    1. Angro Magno
      Angro Magno 2 February 2015 11: 30 New
      +6
      And not the last discovery. I am sure there will be others.
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 2 February 2015 12: 16 New
        -3
        Quote: Angro Magno
        And not the last discovery. I am sure there will be others.

        Here is the discovery:
        issued orders on the humane treatment of prisoners

        Well Duc as he was in Crimea, the issue with the prisoners humanely decided ... the sea of ​​blood is the height of humanism ...
        1. Angro Magno
          Angro Magno 2 February 2015 12: 36 New
          0
          What kind of prisoners in the Crimea in relation to Frunze are we talking about?
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. 11111mail.ru
          11111mail.ru 2 February 2015 18: 42 New
          +4
          Quote: Nayhas
          Well so as he in the Crimea the question with prisoners humanely decided.

          Zalkind- “Countrywoman”, Aaron Kogan- “Bela Kun”, Drabkin_ “Gusev”. Do these names remind you of anything? Have you heard anything about Trotsky?
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. jjj
              jjj 2 February 2015 20: 38 New
              +4
              And today, according to Russia-1, Mlechin and Co. relished the details of how Lavrenty Pavlovich "molested youngsters." The state channel has become shamelessly rotten
            2. Rastas
              Rastas 2 February 2015 21: 04 New
              +1
              Personally, I am not very sorry for the white officers. Fought do not understand why, for some crap. Their brave commanders themselves could not even formulate what they were fighting for, as a result, a regular proser.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. The comment was deleted.
          4. Angro Magno
            Angro Magno 2 February 2015 22: 00 New
            +2
            Quote: 11111mail.ru
            Quote: Nayhas
            Well so as he in the Crimea the question with prisoners humanely decided.

            Zalkind- “Countrywoman”, Aaron Kogan- “Bela Kun”, Drabkin_ “Gusev”. Do these names remind you of anything? Have you heard anything about Trotsky?


            These names are well known. What does Frunze have to do with it?
            1. 11111mail.ru
              11111mail.ru 3 February 2015 16: 55 New
              +1
              Quote: Angro Magno
              These names are well known. What does Frunze have to do with it?

              Frunze here, despite the fact that he had promised that surrender to the "white" repression is not threatened. The “comrades” I mentioned, which you are well aware of, have simply ignored this promise in a communist way ... Are you curious to “turn on the fool” and observe the opponent’s reaction? Well, watch if there is nothing to argue on the merits.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Rastas
      Rastas 2 February 2015 21: 02 New
      +1
      Maybe not an outstanding commander, but the nugget Frunze can be called. A man who did not have a military education smashed the vaunted tsarist generals on the fronts of the Civil War.
  2. Denis
    Denis 2 February 2015 06: 49 New
    -5
    In literary form, this myth is reflected in the work of the writer Boris Pilnyak-Vogau, “The Story of the Unladen Moon”
    Then Trotsky should be believed
    How could he interfere with Stalin?
    The army and the army could finally eliminate the “fifth column” only in the 1930 years, already in the pre-war situation
    He did not belong to these, but he would help to uproot
    1. Angro Magno
      Angro Magno 2 February 2015 11: 35 New
      +13
      In 1925, Stalin was not even the first among equals. He still could not uproot anyone. Trotsky had just been removed. All the struggle was ahead.
      And remove one of the most important allies in the internal party struggle?
      Who else could go to such stupidity. But not Stalin.
      1. Yars
        Yars 2 February 2015 12: 20 New
        +3
        totally agree with you!
        1. jjj
          jjj 2 February 2015 20: 48 New
          +9
          Note that those persons who acted against Russia - the USSR is one of the reincarnations of the concept of Russia - were sent to other senior positions, or were deported abroad with peace. But those who fought for Russia unexpectedly died. Those who stood for Stalin were cut down. And that seemed not enough. At the XVII Congress they demanded unprecedented rights for the extrajudicial destruction of those disloyal to Trotskyism. And all these bloody maniacs Stalin later had to destroy in order to save the country. But Trotskyism managed to survive Stalin. A prime example is the heyday of Khrushchev and the complete falsification of history. It’s good that authors like the one discussed here publish the truth
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Yars
      Yars 2 February 2015 12: 19 New
      +6
      it was Trotsky who wanted the October Revolution to be bloody, so that the brother of his brother would kill more. Trotsky and Lenin poisoned the nations, and Stalin then tried to reunite them. Therefore, Stalin removed him and forced him to answer for fraternal blood!
      1. Egor.nic
        Egor.nic 2 February 2015 16: 27 New
        -3
        Well, about Stalin, you turned down
      2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Humpty
    Humpty 2 February 2015 07: 22 New
    +3
    The museum with his native home stands. As Comrade Stalin said, smoking a pipe
    “You have a good plan, Comrade Frunze.”
    The liberals' version of the “Frunze murder” is nonsense of a mad dog.
    Then the medicine was not competent enough in the field of anesthesia, and there was no overdose.
    An individual reaction to anesthesia has occurred. She was the cause of the death of Frunze on the operating table.
    1. Egor.nic
      Egor.nic 2 February 2015 16: 29 New
      0
      deep expert opinion ... or personal opinion? if the second, then far-fetched
      1. Humpty
        Humpty 2 February 2015 16: 57 New
        +1
        Quote: Egor.nic
        deep expert opinion ... or personal opinion? if the second, then far-fetched

        Rather, the first. And to distrust the words of Professor V. Kantorovich is not a reason for me; he knew what exactly happened firsthand.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  4. Humpty
    Humpty 2 February 2015 07: 39 New
    +5
    Quote: Nayhas
    What was he outstanding? Here is the discovery ...

    Is this a call to once again sprinkle ash on your head? .Myself for Frunze and his other countrymen, whose image is even more indisputably heroic, I will not sprinkle ashes on my head. And I'm not going to debunk some of the myths of sovagitprop about fellow countrymen. It is better to remember their real feat.
  5. omsbon
    omsbon 2 February 2015 08: 33 New
    +9
    Who is the most fierce enemy of Russia and all Russian is Trotsky! Judas by definition of Lenin!
    1. Humpty
      Humpty 2 February 2015 08: 36 New
      +5
      Quote: omsbon
      Who is the most fierce enemy of Russia and all Russian is Trotsky! Judas by definition of Lenin!

      There is a version that Bronstein-Trotsky was in the same closed club "nasty" with Van Rosenfeld-Roosevelt.
      1. omsbon
        omsbon 2 February 2015 16: 42 New
        +2
        Quote: Humpty
        Bronstein - Trotsky was in the same closed club "nasty" with Van Rosenfeld-Roosevelt.


        I BELIEVE !!! CONSISTED "P R O T AND IN N S Y"
  6. avt
    avt 2 February 2015 09: 36 New
    +7
    Well, a personal friend - Kirov, who, according to the memoirs of his adoptive son-Sergeyev, when he arrived in Moscow, stayed at Stalin’s apartment, also, according to the statement of the “historians,” Stalin killed. Well, the fact that confirms this is led by a ditty - Oh, my cucumbers are tomatoes , Stalin Kirova sewed in the corridor "which he composed," a favorite of the party ", a member of the Cheka’s collegium collegium - Kolya Bukharin -, Balabolkin." He is the one who swore allegiance to Stalin, almost joining the family because of close acquaintance with Aliluyeva and who in a penitential letter, which is not in dispute with the current “de-Stalinizers,” he wrote that - “I ran from you to Kamenev” and vice versa — in short — to betray in time, not to betray, but to foresee. “Well, what did you want to wait for ,, faithful Leninists "and specifically the sworn Stalinist friends of the Trotskyists from him ??? From a person who knew allies in the struggle for the cause of communism as flaky and fought with them for specific power?
    1. Roman 11
      Roman 11 3 February 2015 02: 08 New
      0
      Quote: avt
      Kolya Bukharin -, Balabolkin ". The very one who swore allegiance to Stalin, practically joining the family because of close acquaintance with Aliluyeva, and who wrote in a penitential letter that is not in dispute with the current de-Stalinizers, ran away from you to Kamenev, "and vice versa, in short — to betray in time, not to betray, but to anticipate." Well, what did the faithful Leninists want to expect, "and specifically the sworn Stalinist friends of the Trotskyites from him ???

      Nevertheless, Stalin entrusted him with work on the Constitution .......
  7. valokordin
    valokordin 2 February 2015 10: 03 New
    +5
    The author of the article plus, the article is objective and instructive, and then repression, repression. It was not possible to get rid of the enemies of the country without repression. It is hoped that when the president begins to clean the 5th column. Is this column so strong? or for her financial international.
    1. dmb
      dmb 2 February 2015 11: 44 New
      +3
      And what if not a secret you saw the instructiveness of the article? Well, Samsonov and most commentators of the site do not like Trotsky (by the way, I also don’t like him as a person), well, they love Stalin. what does this have to do with historical objectivity? Samsonov, debunking the myth of the murder of Frunze by Stalin, “sculpts” another myth of Trotsky’s murder. In this case, he has exactly the same amount of evidence as the prosecutors of Stalin. This is approximately from the same series that Trotsky, the protege of the “world behind the scenes” Mozh, is so, but without proof, it is an empty chatter, and up to a certain point, Stalin dreamed and spoke of Trotsky about the world revolution. I offer opponents to think about when it is easier to protect the country from attack, when it is alone, or when it has allies?
      1. Egor.nic
        Egor.nic 2 February 2015 16: 32 New
        -2
        think right
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 3 February 2015 12: 19 New
        0
        Rated Trotsky best
        ideological White Guard who fought in the Good Army (and anti-Semite!)
        Purishkevich:
        "it is necessary to disperse the entire headquarters with Denikin at the head and lure to himself
        Trotsky alone - and we will take Moscow in a month. "

        Trotsky was, of course, a pretty villain, but a victory
        it was he who brought the Bolsheviks in the Civil War
        (whether it is good or bad is another - debatable - question).
  8. calocha
    calocha 2 February 2015 10: 51 New
    +2
    It’s necessary to decide, otherwise Russian historians like Svanidze and others like him can tell you what the light of IV Stalin is and what happened during his period. I think you need to CLOSE the mouth of these historians in quotation marks! Close once and for all! And for those who is "on an armored train" - introduce an article for distorting History! ...
    1. Roman 11
      Roman 11 3 February 2015 02: 14 New
      +2
      Quote: calocha
      and then from the zombie’s screen Russian historians such as Svanidze and others like him are telling what the light of I.V. Stalin is and everything that happened during his period.

      Stalin often said that constructive criticism is necessary ...... here, of course, a line is needed. Without errors, miscalculations can not do and will not. Take these crises under capitalism - are they from a good life? Was everything perfect under Peter the Great?
  9. egsp
    egsp 2 February 2015 14: 28 New
    +2
    revolution and war always brought to the top talented people, only now, they were all divided into decent and scum. it’s good that Mikhail Vasilievich belonged to the first group.
  10. Princely
    Princely 2 February 2015 15: 45 New
    +1
    Article PLUS.
    As it is not necessary, it is very necessary to dispel the myth-desu "about the murder of Frunze by Stalin." For historical science and political science an extremely important topic is
    the alignment of cadres and forces in the struggle for power at the top of Soviet power at that time.
    It is important how Stalin managed through Frunze and Voroshilov to push the comprador and Russophobian forces away from the control and management of the Red Army (the Red Army is a powerful tool to seize power and hold this power). It would be desirable for more
    find out about those events.
  11. Egor.nic
    Egor.nic 2 February 2015 16: 35 New
    -2
    empty talk
  12. vjikr
    vjikr 2 February 2015 17: 29 New
    -2
    yeah. nothing else to do like the old ha * but gut
  13. Landser93
    Landser93 2 February 2015 19: 25 New
    +1
    EEEEEEEE war hero? War against their own. Of course, I wildly apologize, but didn’t he give personal guarantees of security to Trotsky during his visit to the Crimea occupied by the Bolsheviks? Did he give personal guarantees of security and amnesty to the 10 thousand remaining soldiers of the Russian Volunteer Army in Crimea, who were then brutally murdered, drowned by such ardent fighters for the rights of Russian workers as Rozalia Samoylovna Zemlyachka (nee Zalkind)
    The same Kolchak against whom he fought even in the Great War distinguished himself, and did not campaign for defeats and the front did not undermine. We all saw how these "heroes" of the civil war are fighting in the Second World War. Fortunately, this punisher did not live to see her.
    Oh shovel propaganda for another min. one generation will work.
  14. Landser93
    Landser93 2 February 2015 19: 31 New
    +1
    By the way, all fighters with the bourgeoisie and for multinationality. I advise you to read the book Melgunova. Red Terror in Russia. There are a lot of interesting things about this punisher and about the Crimea covered in Russian blood.
    1. 34 region
      34 region 3 February 2015 00: 35 New
      +1
      Read the anti-Stalinist book-Forbidden Stalin.
    2. Combitor
      Combitor 3 February 2015 03: 38 New
      +1
      Quote: Landser93
      There are many interesting things about this punisher

      To whose mill do you pour water?
      It is enough for us that we see what terror the Bandera fascists organized under the leadership of the same bourgeoisie today in New Russia.
  15. moskowit
    moskowit 2 February 2015 20: 11 New
    +1
    In 1925, Comrade Stalin was not yet STALIN, but was one of the cohort of equals. And he had no levers to promote and organize the murders of Frunze and the next year Dzerzhinsky. And there was nothing to him. Even idle "truth-seekers" attributed to the Leader the murder of Sergei Mironovich, one of the closest and most loyal associates. But when he became THEME STALIN, then Trotsky died ...
  16. fa2998
    fa2998 2 February 2015 20: 28 New
    +1
    Quote: valokordin
    The author of the article plus, the article is objective and instructive, and then repression, repression. It was not possible to get rid of the enemies of the country without repression. It is hoped that when the president begins to clean the 5th column. Is this column so strong? or for her financial international.

    What is the article about? A detailed biography of Frunze, and in the end the author shifted the blame from one to the other. And the evidence? Yes Frunze annoyed the Trotskyists, but Stalin was nervous about popularity in the Frunze party. And maybe an accident? Everything is Trotsky’s “order”! hi
  17. Roman 11
    Roman 11 3 February 2015 02: 29 New
    +1
    creation of a patriotic military leadership of the USSR in the person of Frunze, Voroshilov, Budyonny and Kotovsky. Thereafter patriotic The leadership of the Finnish war has arrived, as a result of the patriots pushed into dusty boxes and museums ...... Stalin really then got these horsemen, but he thought and realized that it was more expensive for the country. This does not apply to Frunze - an outstanding military leader, strangely before that he did not associate himself with the army service. And then competent planning of operations is already a talent.
  18. Combitor
    Combitor 3 February 2015 03: 34 New
    +2
    << Frunze noted that the Soviet Union should become independent of foreign countries not only in industrial activities, but also in the design and invention field >>
    But it turns out that already in those distant days, they began to pay great attention to IMPORT SUBSTITUTION, realizing that dependence on the West puts our country on its knees practically.
  19. uncle_Andrey
    uncle_Andrey 6 February 2015 02: 45 New
    +3
    Quote: Nayhas
    The myth that Stalin is guilty of the death of the outstanding Soviet commander M. V. Frunze

    What was he outstanding? Here is the discovery ...



    And in fact, this is one of the main legends - the “outstanding military talent” of Frunze, which he, in general, who had never had business with the army before the revolution, of course, did not possess in the least. But how, they will object to me, but his victory? In fact, Frunze owes all of his “military talents” to several people: his chief of staff, Lieutenant General of the tsar’s army Fedor Fedorovich Novitsky and another former lieutenant general of the imperial army Alexander Alekseevich Baltic, who commanded the 4th Army before Frunze, Frunze remained at his post “for errands” - in fact, as a military adviser. Well, the head of the operational department at Frunze was Colonel of the General Staff of the Imperial Army Vladimir Kiriakovich Triandafillov. A brilliant military theorist who developed the theory of deep breakthroughs and operations, which later fell into the doctrine of blitzkrieg (lightning war). It was the military developments of Triandafillov, after the catastrophe that was cleverly arranged by Vladimir Kiriakovich, that Marshal Tukhachevsky tried to appropriate another military mediocrity, but he did not have the mind to just understand Triandafillov’s creative heritage. To the honor of Frunze, he had the intelligence not to shoot the former tsarist generals and colonel, but to use their knowledge and experience. Of course, neither Frunze nor Soviet military historians and theorists in general ever mentioned their names, but Mikhail Vasilievich gained his fame as the “best strategist”.
  20. iury.vorgul
    iury.vorgul 17 February 2015 12: 01 New
    +1
    Comrades! As far as I understand, “VO” is mainly read by patriots, those who want Russia to be a strong, stable and rich state. So, I am writing for those who constantly cry out for Stalin: they say that the repressions, the famine, Kirova killed and. etc. And you look, who mainly scolds Stalin - such "historians" as SVONIDZE and the like: liberals, tolerasts, shit-democrats. Now Svidomity connected. This does not bother you. But those historians who speak from patriotic positions, but not stupidly, but with criticism of our current "liberal", but really oligarchic, economy, they recognize the crucial role of Stalin in building a powerful Soviet economy and in the Great Victory.
  21. Snoop
    Snoop April 9 2017 21: 11 New
    0
    By the way, there is a little mistake. At first, da Frunze was a supporter of the theory of crushing, but later he listened to a group of former tsarist officers led by Svechin, who stood for strategic defense. Therefore, Frunze began to create partisan bases, the teachings of future partisans, etc.
  22. Irina Komolova
    Irina Komolova 28 June 2020 09: 53 New
    0
    [quote of the Voronezh peasant woman Sofya Alekseevna.] [/ quote] Mother at Frunze's name was Marfa Efimovna. And Sofya Alekseevna is the wife.