Departure of Russian armies from Galicia. Loss of Przemysl and Lviv

New German breakthrough and loss of Peremyshl


The chief of the General Staff of Germany, Erich von Falkenhayn, after the end of the Gorlitsky breakthrough wanted to complete the offensive. The goal was achieved, the Russian troops were rejected from the Carpathians. However, the commander of the shock Austro-German grouping Mackensen and his chief of staff, von Sect, persuaded the German headquarters to continue the operation. They say that it is necessary to use the moment when the Russian South-Western Front is defeated and has not received reinforcements.

Mackensen regrouped his strike fist to Yaroslav. I did not even have time to greatly weakened by heavy 2-weekly battles of the 3-I army to withdraw to the river. San, like 17 in May, German troops crossed over to Yaroslav on the right bank of the r. San and new breakthroughs began to wedge into the location of our army. At the same time, they launched an attack south of Przemysl, against Mosciscu. The approaches to Yaroslav were covered by the 24 Corps, in which there was only one bloodless 49 Division. The avalanches of the German troops rejected the Russian division for San and took the city. The German Guards Corps forced the San and captured the bridgehead.

Russian troops almost did not respond with artillery fire on the volleys of the enemy. In the period of 18 — 24 in May, Mackensen undertook a strong pressure on Russian positions in the r. San, between Yaroslav and Peremyshl, and finally established itself on the right bank of the river, rejecting Russian troops along the r. Lyubachovka. 8-I army, despite all the difficulties, held a blow. The headquarters strengthened Brusilov’s army, sending the 5 Caucasian Corps from the reserve. On the left flank, the 9-I and 11-I armies inflicted a strong counter-attack on the enemy and did not allow the enemy to break through the Dniester. However, north of Przemysl, the Germans continued to push the weak 3 th army. Straighten the position of counterstrikes did not work. The Germans joined several bridgeheads, regrouped their forces, and the 24 of May continued the offensive.

The army of Brusilov was reinforced with two corps of 2-m Caucasian and 23-m, which the Headquarters transferred from the North-Western Front. The front command organized a counter-strike between pp. Lyubachovka and Cherry. The blow was frontal, to the top of the ledge of the German springboard. Brusilov objected, saying that it was unreasonable, or rather to beat from the flanks, under the base. But the front headquarters insisted on it and was mistaken. Despite the organized counter-attack of 3 by the Russian corps, the German army could not be discarded. Russian fresh units went into a frontal attack and were raised by machine-gun and artillery fire. Russian troops could not advance, only wasted people.

As a result, the fortress of Przemysl found itself in an outgoing corner of Russian location and from three sides was covered by enemy troops. From Przemysl to the east led by a single railway. The Germans set their sights from the north and south to reach the station of Mosciska (Mostiska) in order to intercept the highway and surround the fortress garrison.

More recently, at the end of March, the powerful fortress of Przemysl, as a result of an almost six-month siege and stubborn fighting, finally became Russian. And so she had to give so quickly. Denikin wrote about the Battle of Przemysl: “The 11 days of the brutal battle of the 4 Iron Division ... The 11 days of the terrible rumble of German artillery, literally tearing down the entire ranks of the trenches along with their defenders ... And the silence of my batteries ... We almost did not respond - there is nothing. Even cartridges for guns were given the most limited number. The regiments, exhausted to the last degree, fought off one attack after another - with bayonets or shooting at close range; blood flowed, rows thinned, grave mounds grew .. When, after three days of silence with our only 6-inch battery, she was given 50 projectiles, the phone was immediately reported to all the shelves and all companies; and all the arrows breathed with joy and relief. " "For the first and only time, I saw the brave of their brave Markov in a state of near despair." Markov was removing the remnants of the 13 regiment from under enemy fire, and the commander of the 14 was walking alongside. The shell bombs knocked his head off. The torso, from which gushing blood, stood a few more moments. And Markov, drenched in the blood of his comrade, walked on.

Departure of Russian armies from Galicia. Loss of Przemysl and Lviv

Russian gunners

In fact, a powerful fortress (the whole fortified area, which had to be taken by the Russian army) was no longer there. The forts were disarmed, many of the fortifications were destroyed, most of the guns and supplies were removed. In Przemysl only part of the artillery and several thousand guards remained. To keep the fortress in such conditions, with an acute shortage of shells, there was not the slightest possibility. Przemysl was not ready for a long siege, there was no combat-ready garrison, fortifications were not restored, there were no necessary reserves. However, the capture of Przemysl in March 1915 was used for a widespread propaganda campaign. And now it was necessary to give the fortress. The resonance was great: the enemies received an excellent propaganda excuse, the prestige of the Russian army was undermined by the allies, the Russian liberal public received an excuse to shout about the shortcomings of the regime and the army.

As a result, military issues were associated with big politics. Therefore, the commandant of Przemysl then received an order to ship the remaining artillery and supplies to the trains, then return to the position. Commandant Delevich asked to give a clear order: to fight or evacuate? About the same requested and Brusilov. But the front command responded evasively: either "look at Przemysl only as a section of the front, and not at a fortress," or "hold, but not defend at all costs." By the arrival of the enemy in Peremyshl, there were no more or less capable troops left, only a few companies of militiamen with warrant officers-ensigns instead of commanders. Therefore, in fact, there was no battle for the city. Enemy units began to infiltrate the city, and on the night of June 3 Brusilov ordered the abandonment of the fortress. Sapyor blew up the most powerful forts.

3 June 1915, the troops of General Mackensen, almost without meeting resistance, entered the fortress. Meanwhile, at the same time, on the left wing of the South-Western Front, the 11-I army slowly, with gradual, stubborn rear-guard battles, was withdrawing beyond the r. The Dniester, to the Mikolaev-Galich sector, to the left of its location the 9 Army with its right flank is at Tysmenitsa, while the left flank remained in place at the Romanian border.

The resonance from the fall of Przemysl was great. The Russian public was indignant, the allies "sympathized", and the German and Austrian newspapers trumpeted a colossal victory. Although the same Brusilov believed that the army only got rid of a heavy and unnecessary burden. The fortress was not ready for a long siege, it was necessary to leave it in order not to destroy the troops. The front was reduced to 30 kilometers, Brusilov now had enough troops, and he planned to stop the enemy.

However, the front headquarters thought otherwise. Ivanov and his headquarters believed that the campaign was lost, the enemy was about to break into Ukraine, and Kiev had to be prepared for defense. It should be noted that Ivanov and his headquarters simply repeated the thoughts of Dragomirov, who on May 7 wrote in an official note to the commander-in-chief: “Our strategic position is hopeless. Our line of defense is very long, we cannot move troops with the necessary speed, and the very weakness of our troops makes them less mobile; we lose the ability to fight. Przemysl should be handed over - along with all of Galicia. The Germans will inevitably rush into Ukraine. Kiev should be strengthened. Russia must stop all military activity until it regains its strength. ” Then Dragomirov was driven out of the front headquarters for such thoughts, transferred to the General Headquarters, at the disposal of the Supreme Commander.

The High Command was confident that on the southern flank the enemy was collecting an even more powerful strike force, waiting for a “main attack” from the south. It was believed that from the south, German and Austrian troops would try to encircle the entire front. Brusilov began to take away troops. They pointed out that Przemysl fell, so this direction becomes secondary. The 5 body of the Caucasus was transferred to the 3 army, the 21 body was transferred to the front reserve. The 2-th Caucasian and 23-th corps were transferred to the 9-th army, where they were waiting for a new strike by the enemy. Then the remnants of the 3 Army were transferred to the North-Western Front. Brusilov protested, pointing out that a weakened army would not keep Lviv. But he did not listen. The enemy immediately took advantage of the weakening of Brusilov’s army and increased the pressure on the Lvov direction.



Departure from Galicia

With the loss of the Sana and Peremyshl line, the Russian armies of the South-Western Front were forced to move to their own borders in divergent directions with further withdrawal. There was no predetermined defensive position in the rear where the enemy could be detained. A state of the troops and the constant pressure of the enemy did not allow to keep the eastern part of Galicia. The front command, headed by Ivanov, was in moral decay and lost control of the armies. The High Command did not dare to withdraw from the management of the royal pet. Only transferred first 4 th army, and then 3 th army in the North-Western Front, as they were now more connected with the front Alekseeva. Comfronte Ivanov formed a special group of troops from five corps under the command of General Olohovo in the interval between the 3 and 8 armies, in the area of ​​Lyubachuv. But this measure did not lead to success. Olohova’s poorly organized group was unable to rectify the situation.

In early June, the 1915 of Mr. Mackensen eased the pressure on the Russian army. This was due to the need to establish rear communications and, in part, with the declaration of the war of Austria-Hungary by the Italy’s 24 in May. The Austro-Hungarian command initially wanted to regroup and transfer significant contingents to the Italian border, leaving the Germans to continue the struggle against the Russians in Galicia. However, the Italians were bad soldiers, could not use the surprise attack and a large numerical superiority. As a result, even minor numerically weaker Austro-Hungarian divisions stopped the Italian advance. The need for a significant redeployment of forces disappeared. Although Vienna and removed some of the forces from the Russian and Serbian fronts, but not as radically as planned at first.

June 3 in Silesia, in the castle of Pless, a military meeting of the German and Austrian leaders was held. The meeting was attended by Kaiser Wilhelm II, Chief of the German General Staff Falkenhayn, Field Marshal Hindenburg, Generals Ludendorff, Hoffmann, Mackensen, Chief of the Austro-Hungarian General Staff General von Götzentorf. The German High Command hesitated: Hindenburg successfully developed the operation against Riga, the Allies began to stir on the Western Front, so the German High Command was afraid to get bogged down deeply on the Russian front between the territory of Poland and Volyn. Falkenhayn noted: "Russians can retreat to the great depth of their country, but we cannot persecute them endlessly." On the other hand, she was tempted to inflict a decisive defeat on the Russian army by transferring significant forces from Galicia to the Brest-Litovsk sector, and this maneuver, together with the armies of Hindenburg, advancing from the north to close the ring around the Russian armies in Poland. Hindenburg argued that there is a real opportunity to surround the Russian army in the "Polish bag". As a result, hope to deliver the final blow to Russia took up. Although in the end, Falkenhain turned out to be right: it would not be possible to surround the Russian armies, the war would drag out.

From mid-June, Mackensen's troops resumed the offensive. The vise of three armies was compressed around Lvov: the 11-I German army of General Mackensen was advancing from the north, the 3-I was Austro-Hungarian from the west, the 2-I was Austro-Hungarian from the south. From the city began evacuation of rear institutions. On June 22, the enemy intercepted the railways to Warsaw and Mikolaev, only the roads to Dubno and Galich remained. Our troops left Lviv. After the loss of Lvov, Ivanov issued a directive on the withdrawal of the 3 Army with a group of Olohovo to Russian Poland - to the front of Lublin - Vladimir-Volynsky, 8-I and 11-I army retreated towards the Kiev district, 9-I army had to relate front with the position of the 11 Army.

The situation remained grave. The front commander Ivanov was out of place. But he was a favorite of the king, had great connections with the court. Loved him and the public. Therefore, he was left at his post. The troops were demoralized. Defeat, retreat, loss of cities and territories, which were so busy were occupied, lack of ammunition and heavy losses undermined the spirit of the soldiers. Someone started to panic, believing the rumors about the enemy’s rounds. Some units, completely exhausted and demoralized, surrendered. Others at the first onslaught of the enemy, shelling fell into panic, throwing positions and fled. The shortage of rifles was added to the projectile famine. While attacking, there were enough rifles, they picked up weapon killed and wounded, captured trophies. During the retreat, there was nothing to replace the losses. Marching replenishment arrived with bare hands, which further strengthened the negative attitude in the army. When the shelves appeared whole teams of unarmed soldiers.

Brusilov was forced to give the order, which resembled similar instructions during the future Great Patriotic War. The general wrote that the front approached the borders of Russia, it is impossible to retreat further. “It’s time to stop and finally consider the enemy properly, completely forgetting the pitiful words about the might of enemy artillery, superior forces, tirelessness, invincibility and the like, and therefore I order: for the faint-hearted who leave the ranks or surrender, there should be no mercy; both the rifle and the machine-gun fire must be directed at those who give up, even if with a cease-fire at the enemy, at retreating or fleeing to act in the same way ... ”.

Tough measures helped. Brusilov's 8 Army stopped, the first at the front. The enemy could no longer advance. On the southern flank, the 11-I and 9-I armies moved to the line of the Dniester and its tributaries. Russian troops entrenched at the turn of the Hill - Vladimir-Volynsky, 20 km west of Brod, 15 km west of Buchach. The German and Austrian troops tried several times to break through the Russian positions in one or the other direction, but without success. Completely clear the possessions of Austria-Hungary from the Russian troops Germans and Austrians could not.


Ammunition and rifles left by Russian troops during the retreat

Results

The Russian army suffered a strategic defeat, losing most of Galicia, Przemysl and Lviv. For two months of almost continuous fighting, our troops left the territory from 100 to 300 km. The 3 Army, which took the first, most terrible blow, lost 140 thousand men killed wounded and captured. In the divisions of the 8 Army, there are thousands of soldiers left for the 3-4. In just two months of fighting only by prisoners, the Russian army lost about 500 thousand people with 344 guns. However, for the enemy it was not a “triumphal march”. Only the Mackensen army of the original 136 thousand people lost two-thirds of the composition - 90 thousand people.

During the 2 month of heavy fighting, all previous successes of the Russian army were negated. Now the Russian high command had to solve the task of withdrawing troops from Russian Poland, since this region lost the role of a possible springboard for attacking Germany and threatened to destroy the army there.

Militarily, the main reason for the defeat of the Russian army was not only the superiority of the Austro-German troops in forces and assets in the main line, but also the major mistakes of the Russian Headquarters, the command of the South-Western Front and the commander of 3 Army Radko-Dmitriev. The Russian high command incorrectly assessed the situation before the battle, which predetermined the defeat of the front. Since early April, it was known that the enemy is preparing a strike on the 3 Army, but the Stavka and the front persistently neglect this information and continue the offensive in the Carpathians, instead of going over to defense and regroup their forces and means. The command of the front and the army failed to organize the preparation and occupation of defensive lines in depth. As a result, when the Germans and the Austrians launched an offensive, one and a half Russian armies (8 and part of 3) turned out to be deeply stuck in the Carpathians, and could not quickly withdraw, regroup and stop the enemy. Moreover, instead of withdrawing the troops, taking them out from under the blow of the enemy, who has enormous superiority in heavy artillery, temporarily go on the defensive, transfer reserves and inflict a powerful flank counterattack, the Supreme Commander and Front Command require the command of the 3 Army go to the counter attack. The arriving reserves were used in parts, as they were approached, therefore weak frontal counterattacks did not reach the goal, and led to unjustifiably high losses. Reserves were substituted for the frontal blows of the enemy and wasted. Later, the Russian command could not organize a strike group on the flank of the advancing Mackensen ram, which could disrupt further advancement of the enemy.

Thus, the mistakes of command (at the level of the Headquarters, the front and the army) led to a severe defeat for the Russian army, leaving our troops to the whole of Galicia they had won. As a result of the Gorlitsky breakthrough, the successes of the Russian troops in the 1914 campaign of the year and in the Carpathian operation were frustrated, and the threat of encirclement of our armies in Poland arose.

In Vienna, Ottokar Chernin, a prominent politician and future Foreign Minister of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, suggested that the difficult military and political situation in Russia makes it possible to start separate negotiations with Petrograd. The politician believed that peace between the Central Powers and Russia is possible on the basis of an equal refusal of interested parties from all territorial acquisitions and claims. Chernin believed that the “most favorable chance” had come for the peace agreement. However, his proposal did not find support in Berlin. Kaiser Wilhelm and his entourage still counted on the complete collapse of the Russian army in the "Polish bag", after which it would be possible to negotiate with Petrograd from the position of the winner. The chance to start peace negotiations has been lost.

The western allies of Russia finally understood the danger of the situation on the Russian front. The performance of Italy could not balance the strike of the Austro-German troops in the East. However, neither the French army nor the English army at that time were able to launch a quick and powerful offensive against Germany.


Russian infantry armed with a three-line rifle of the 1891 model of the year (Mosin rifle)
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Russian Uzbek 29 July 2015 06: 49 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    absolutely no conclusions were drawn from the defeat in the Russo-Japanese War and the result was corresponding ...
    1. sherp2015 29 July 2015 10: 02 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Russian Uzbek
      absolutely no conclusions were drawn from the defeat in the Russo-Japanese War and the result was corresponding ...


      Military industry, fuels and lubricants, gas, should be in the hands of the state
      The capitalists (businessmen, oligarchs) will again betray in difficult times
      and sell everything that the enemy can.
    2. Pilat2009 29 July 2015 16: 46 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Russian Uzbek
      absolutely no conclusions were drawn from the defeat in the Russo-Japanese War and the result was corresponding ...

      Very interesting. And what conclusions were drawn from the defeat in the First World War by 1941?
      1. Roman 11 29 July 2015 20: 08 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Pilat2009
        Very interesting. And what conclusions were drawn from the defeat in the First World War by 1941?

        The fact that they will warn about the attack ahead of time) Riding on horses, there’s no talk of generals — they almost shot everyone, etc. ...... Perhaps there was one very significant and fundamentally upturning factor — they provided the technical basis (industrialization) and its mobilization, with evacuation capabilities. And of course, society rallied, no Bolsheviks stirred up treason in the rear and at the front, all the more this was excluded against the background of the atrocities of the Nazis !!
      2. Russian Uzbek 30 July 2015 06: 46 New
        • -2
        • 0
        -2
        Well, at least industrialization was carried out!
      3. oldkap22 30 July 2015 12: 02 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        conclusions were drawn about the readiness of the industry. stocks. about the need to have technical and quantitative superiority about the role of transport in the armed struggle, as well as the moral readiness to make sacrifices in order to defeat the enemy ... eliminating common illiteracy is also working on mistakes ...
    3. Roman 11 29 July 2015 19: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Russian Uzbek
      absolutely no conclusions were drawn from the defeat in the Russo-Japanese War and the result was corresponding ...

      And what conclusions could be ?? As the generals stomped through the careers thanks to their titles, this went on ... What could this emperor do about it? Nothing ...... The emperor was not of that caliber, under such an empire. Individual divisors like Kornilov are an exception to the rule. P.S. Who can tell how to contact the author?
  2. Same lech 29 July 2015 07: 14 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    absolutely no conclusions were drawn from the defeat in the Russo-Japanese War and the result was corresponding ...


    There was no new SUVOROV and KUTUZOV in those years in the Russian army ....

    there is still in the internet a photo of a pile of bones of Russian soldiers from the battlefields in those places .... I have a very painful impression of what I saw ... I do not want our soldiers to die again for the interests of the bourgeois.
    1. parusnik 29 July 2015 07: 56 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      There was no new SUVOROV and KUTUZOV in those years in the Russian army ....... Even if they were..but they didn’t fight a lot with one bayonet if there wasn’t enough ammunition and weapons ..
    2. Russian Uzbek 29 July 2015 08: 43 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      was Brusilov!
      but there were Kuropatkin and Samson and Renenkappa ... and the Tsar nowadays canonized!
      1. parusnik 29 July 2015 10: 50 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        There was ... and his offensive was .. And this front-line operation was named after him .. The supply of the army did not improve from this ..
      2. Roman 11 29 July 2015 20: 22 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Quote: Russian Uzbek
        was Brusilov!

        A professional military man, but not a genius, not Moltke ..... To become one, you need to constantly improve your skills, conduct exercises and rise to the top level! And how to get up there, if there are all sorts of great princes, parquet and banquet generals and persons close like Grishka Rasputin ?? Now who is in charge of the army? Bagration, Rokossovsky ..... or the former Minister for Emergency Situations ........ we will not touch the past furniture maker) for the 5-day war.
    3. jktu66 29 July 2015 16: 23 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      There was no new SUVOROV and KUTUZOV in those years in the Russian army ....
      Well, there were no Napoleons, Nelsons, great Fredericks and the armies of other warring countries. But! After a difficult, but NOT strategic defeat of 1915, the colonel became the head of the Russian imperial army (well, he couldn’t sign for himself the general’s ranks, as he said) N. Romanov, who had an excellent military education, and from The end of 1915 to the beginning of 1917, the Russian army not only recovered from defeat, but also achieved a number of significant victories, put Turkey on the brink of disaster, practically bleeding Austria-Hungary (the army of which at that time was very strong, for example, it made almost no difficulty in smash the trash all over Italy, and the Russian Austrians were too tough), and prepared the strategic defeat of Germany on the eastern front and the seizure of the straits by the Black Sea Fleet.
      And there were outstanding Russian generals about whom we are simply little aware. Unfortunately, in the USSR 1mv was declared a disgraceful and insignificant page in history, while other victorious countries, covering the history of 1mv, emphasized their successes and did not “notice” the contribution of Russia. For example, the battle on the Marne - participated on both sides - 600 thousand, the battle in Galicia in 1914 -1.5 million, - is absent in the version of the 1mv story published in the EU. However, in the history of 2mv, many Western "explorers" and museums mention the Eastern Front as something secondary. Like, there was some kind of Stalingrad, But the Battle of Guadalcanal is a colossal! laughing
      1. Roman 11 29 July 2015 20: 30 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: jktu66
        For example, the battle on the Marne - participated on both sides - 600 thousand, the battle in Galicia in 1914 -1.5 million, - is absent in the version of the 1mv story published in the EU. However, in the history of 2mv, many Western "explorers" and museums mention the Eastern Front as something secondary. Like, there was some kind of Stalingrad, But the Battle of Guadalcanal is a colossal!

        Do not attach importance, well, since we saved them, well, two ......... and then by chance we do not have time, then none of them will have to remember Guadalcanal))
  3. parusnik 29 July 2015 07: 55 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Russian troops almost did not respond with artillery fire to enemy salvoes... There was nothing .. echelons with ammunition somewhere in the rear stood ...
    1. Banson 29 July 2015 09: 05 New
      • -5
      • 0
      -5
      Not in the rear. They simply weren't there. This is the Tsarist monarchist, capitalist regime. What is now beginning again.
      1. reservist 29 July 2015 10: 58 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        from an article by Roman Islushchenko
        In a secret official report, the expenditure from August to December 1914 was indicated at 464 thousand rounds per month. It turned out that by January 1, 1915, Russian artillery shot 2,3 million shells. Including unspent pre-war stock and new production Russia entered 1915 with 4,5 million shells. “Any open-minded, even very strict critic will agree that shouting under such conditions about a disaster due to the lack of shots when only 37 percent or a little over one third of the total stock was used up, as if not a reason, ”continues Manikovsky. The general gives calculations showing that shells were issued and procured regularly. The problem was their timely delivery to the forefront.
        vpk-news.ru/articles/22723
    2. jktu66 29 July 2015 16: 31 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      The Russian troops almost did not respond with artillery fire to the enemy volleys ... There was nothing .. echelons with ammunition were somewhere in the rear ...
      In 1915, ALL warring powers experienced a shell hunger, because ALL parties assumed that the war would last a maximum of six months. Russia, like England with France, and Germany, albeit with a delay, organized the release of shells in 1915-1916, shells of some calibers fired in tsarist Russia were enough for the Great Patriotic War
  4. Bagnyuk 29 July 2015 11: 21 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    all this is nonsense .. advice right up to the Volga heels greased with fat ...
    1. Heimdall48 29 July 2015 13: 33 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      I agree. Divorced - "..Tsarist monarchist, capitalist regime." This regime Russia built and kept for a thousand years. And rebuilt when necessary. Education wanted something fresh - that’s how we disintegrate their rotten theories, put into practice, for a hundred years.
      1. Rastas 29 July 2015 15: 01 New
        • -2
        • 0
        -2
        Right You wanted people worthy of life, even forever bend on the gentlemen’s back. Take history objectively. By the 17th year, the state monarchical system had outlived itself.
        1. Heimdall48 29 July 2015 15: 44 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          How did you determine that you are obsolete? Let us take the end of the 17th century — two Crimean campaigns were lost under Sophia (a lot of people died), the first Azov campaign by Peter was completely lost. The country has a mess and degradation.
          It seems that Peter would die at that moment, and such a fabulist would write that the monarchist system has outlived itself, it is necessary to make a revolution, etc. etc...
          But in reality, it turned out that he had not only not outlived, but also reached the peak.
          You wanted people worthy of life, let them always bend on the gentlemen’s back

          And how do you determine this? The people are not Trotsky with Milyukov. The people are millions of peasants who at the beginning of the 20th level did not go far from the times of Ivan the Terrible. What did they want there? Land reform would have been normal and they would have had enough for another 500 years. These are the Milyukovs with Trotsky (collectively), and they broke the Stolypin reform. So do not grind the language in vain for Soviet propaganda - they’ve been grinding it for 70 years.
          1. Rastas 29 July 2015 16: 37 New
            • -1
            • 0
            -1
            And here is the 17th century and the Azov campaigns ??? The system has become obsolete by the beginning of the 20th century, do you understand this ??? Here is the fact that the people have not gone far for 500 years and the reason for the degradation of the country was hidden. What can I say that out of 100 ordinary people, 70 were illiterate. The Stolypin reforms failed, as if today they were not praised. You at least read the Russian classics of that time. Then maybe you won’t crunch the French bun.
            1. Heimdall48 29 July 2015 16: 58 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              And here is the 17th century and the Azov campaigns ???

              Yes, despite the fact that the situation is absolutely parallel. There, the system quickly and successfully upgraded to the needs of the current moment, and in the 20th century you refuse the same system to such an opportunity. I want to understand - why?
              The system has become obsolete by the beginning of the 20th century, do you understand this ???
              So explain in detail - what was it?
              Here is that the people for 500 years have not gone far and the reason for the degradation of the country

              Here you can argue. My grandfather needed a bigger piece of land for happiness and that the state did not interfere with work. And at present, a person cannot live without a pension and a porcelain toilet. Who has degraded that?
              1. Rastas 29 July 2015 17: 33 New
                • -2
                • 0
                -2
                Well, you know, in the 17th century, putting on a stake was normal, but today it would seem wild. The consciousness of people is undergoing evolution. I don’t know who has the porcelain toilet, then you carry some nonsense, but people just wanted a better, dignified life so that they would not be treated like cattle. People like you, instead of seriously studying history, are more occupied with reading any conspiracy theological old man's garbage.
              2. Banson 29 July 2015 20: 55 New
                • -4
                • 0
                -4
                Quote: Heimdall48
                Yes, despite the fact that the situation is absolutely parallel. There, the system quickly and successfully upgraded to the needs of the current moment, and in the 20 century you refuse the same system in this possibility. I want to understand - why?

                Because NOT rebuilt idiot.
                1. Heimdall48 30 July 2015 08: 46 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  It was rebuilt in such a way - outdated shell hunger, built factories, etc. Everything would have settled down in an evolutionary way. What reasons not to believe in it? Chatterboxes and scumbags of different nationalities did not allow to finish this process.
                  1. Banson 30 July 2015 09: 55 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Heimdall48
                    So rebuilt -

                    Not rebuilt. With a creak, only small changes took place, which represented a drop in the sea from the necessary minimum.
                    Quote: Heimdall48
                    obsolete shell hunger, built factories, etc. Everything would have settled down in an evolutionary way.

                    In an evolutionary way, we would meet the 41 with the Trilinear, and the Three-Inch and understandable results.
                    Quote: Heimdall48
                    What reasons not to believe in it?

                    A simple analysis of recent history. Then there was a kind of semi-feudal, bourgeois-monarchist, aristocratic formation of the state. Now, in fact, it is almost the same thing - a capitalist, liberal-aristocratic state. What we see. Since the collapse of the USSR 26 December 1991 years have passed 24 years (and the shitmen are yelling that “Russia is at a crossroads in an era of change.” There was no civil war. The dashing 90 went back a long time ago. During this time, everything that was possible was stolen, collapsed, and stolen. Including huge pieces of originally Slavic territories (Ukraine ). All the positive changes that exist, despite all the efforts of some part of the authorities, still come with a creak and obviously drown in a sea of ​​negative factors. This is business - nothing personal. Then (under the king) everything was much worse, even dumber and dumber disgusting.
                    Quote: Heimdall48
                    Chatterboxes and scumbags of different nationalities did not allow to finish this process.

                    And then the talkers and scumbags of different nationalities? The 1917 revolution of the year was just initiated by the Russian people. If you think that this revolution was made by some scumbags of "Jewish-English nationality" then answer me the following questions:
                    1. Why then did the entire industry of the USSR not come under the control of Western corporations?
                    2. Why then didn’t all the natural resources of the USSR come under the control of Western corporations?
                    3. Why, for 70 years, have they so fiercely fought against the "communist plague" without sparing their stomach? After all, they themselves created it judging by your rhetoric.
                    4. Why in the Civil War did the armed forces of the West take the side of the white movement, which fought for the return of the former monarchy?
                    5. Why did all those negative processes cited in 1 and 2 just begin to happen after the death of the USSR and the coming to power of our "beloved" shit, with their power from "Russia that we" lost "?
                    Before stupidly chanting the stupid slogans with which the present, “wise” Orthodox elders have pumped you up with such deep and low voices (well, what would be as “wise” and truthful as possible), you should at least analyze them at least at the level of the logic of the first order - correlate their talk with real well-known facts. And if it’s not beating for you, then think before you speak. All those questions that you asked are considered in the video that I cited. But naturally you just had enough brains to immediately minus, without even looking at it.
                    1. Heimdall48 30 July 2015 10: 12 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      The revolution of 1917 was just initiated by the Russian people.

                      The conversation seems to be meaningless. You decide with your own people first - to whom you belong, and then throw slogans and hang labels about shit, capitalism, socialism, etc.
                      If for you the Russian people are Blanqui, Dzhugashvili, Bronstein, Ordzhonikidze, Zemlyachki, Apfelbaum, Kaganovichi, Dzerzhinsky, Menzhinsky, Berries, Beria .... and there is no number for them, then we have different peoples. We didn’t live in Vyatka province, and now, to their great joy, there are not many. Fasten the international further))
                      1. Banson 30 July 2015 10: 21 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        The conversation seems to be meaningless.

                        Answer me my xnumx questions. The fact that you ignore the obvious only says that I'm dealing with zombies.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        Dzhugashvili

                        I.V. Stalin was a Georgian - part of the Republic of Ingushetia and the USSR. What is the problem? Our country is, as it were, a multinational country and the Friendship of Peoples was clearly declared. Naturally, when he came to power in his team, he scored a lot of Georgians. But I didn’t forget about the Russians. All these people were still patriots of the motherland. And it was not for nothing that our leader changed the name of Dzhugashvili to the more canonical Stalin. Once again - all these people were from the USSR and RI. In tsarist times, many higher government posts were held by Germans and French. And the Romanovs themselves are not entirely Russian to be honest.
                      2. Heimdall48 30 July 2015 10: 40 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        I answer as far as possible.
                        1. Why then did the entire industry of the USSR not come under the control of Western corporations?
                        2. Why then didn’t all the natural resources of the USSR come under the control of Western corporations?

                        The answer is obvious - because the Bolsheviks were tough pragmatists, understood their interests and were not going to scatter resources in order to please anyone. Well this is very natural when people without morality and principles throw their benefactors.
                        3. Why, for 70 years, have they so fiercely fought against the "communist plague" without sparing their stomach? After all, they themselves created it judging by your rhetoric.

                        Like two fingers on asphalt - under Stalin the regime was reborn and moved away from its foundations. All who stood at the base were buried in the grave. Why? The answer is above - Stalin was again a pragmatist and a scumbag and did not share power.
                        4. Why in the Civil War did the armed forces of the West take the side of the white movement, which fought for the return of the former monarchy?

                        Lying. They stood on the side of the whites purely formally so that they did not fade ahead of time. Well, maybe they needed Russia's participation in the WWI, from which the Bolsheviks left. Read the memoirs of Denikin and white officers about the help of the Entente. What makes you think that whites fought for the monarchy? Where did you get this is a poppycock of clean water.
                        5. Why did all those negative processes cited in 1 and 2 just begin to happen after the death of the USSR and the coming to power of our "beloved" shit, with their power from "Russia that we" lost "?

                        I did not quite understand how this issue is connected with the white cause and the monarchy, which we are discussing here. But I will answer that the same thieves turned out in power as the USSR collapsed. It was no longer held back by any ideology and postulates of the party and went robbing to the fullest.
                        Friendship of Peoples was clearly declared.

                        Well, yes - also write that under the Tsar, equality of faiths was declared. And the Pale of Settlement did not exist.
                        In tsarist times, many higher government posts were held by the Germans and French. And the Romanovs themselves are not entirely Russian to be honest.

                        They were Europeans, like Russians. If you take a German and educate him in Russian culture and faith, then he will be Russian - both in appearance and in spirit. But in Georgian and Tatar all their lives it will be written who they are, if not verti.
                      3. Banson 30 July 2015 11: 07 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        The answer is obvious - because the Bolsheviks were tough pragmatists, understood their interests and were not going to scatter resources in order to please anyone. Well this is very natural when people without morality and principles throw their benefactors.

                        You know, you have a very tricky thread of argumentation. Well, well, even assuming this is so. Who took advantage of whom in this case — the West by the Bolsheviks in order to destroy Russia or the Bolsheviks by the west in order to create the most powerful Russian superpower in the world, which launched man into space for the first time in the world? And if the latter, then what exactly is the fault of the Bolsheviks then? What did they do wrong?
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        Like two fingers on asphalt - under Stalin the regime was reborn and moved away from its foundations.

                        Hmm .. What particular foundations did he move away from? The basis is Communism and democracy i.e. power of the people (councils). All this passed from Lenin to Stalin unchanged. You're wrong. The degeneration of the CPSU occurred somewhat later and for completely different reasons.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        Lying. They stood on the side of whites purely formally, so that they did not fade ahead of time.

                        No, not a lie. English, German, Japanese and etc. troops occupied the territory of the USSR and led a database with the Red Army. This is a reliable fact, like the Brest Peace. Also, with the money of Western countries, White armies were created and formed. The same army of Kolchak for example. What do you think - they fought against what they themselves created? Why are you talking nonsense.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        But I will answer that the same thieves turned out in power as the USSR collapsed. It was no longer held back by any ideology and postulates of the party and went robbing to the fullest.

                        That is, you actually recognize that the ideology and postulates of the CPSU were correct and aimed at the good of the motherland. The fact is that in tsarist capitalism, on the semi-feudal "yeast" of a still class state, "robbing to the fullest" of these same children turned out to be much better than even in the era of the dashing 90's of Yeltsin’s EreFia.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        Well, yes - also write that under the Tsar, equality of faiths was declared. And the Pale of Settlement did not exist.

                        I'm talking about the USSR, not about RI. Stalin came to power in Soviet times. At the time of the Republic of Ingushetia, division along ethnic lines took place. Moreover, to some extent, the Russian emperors were even right in pursuing such a national policy.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        They were Europeans, like Russians. If you take a German and educate him in Russian culture and faith, then he will be Russian - both in appearance and in spirit. But in Georgian and Tatar all their lives it will be written who they are, if not verti.

                        I do not understand. You blame the Bolsheviks for the fact that the Revolution in Russia is NOT the work of Russians. You suddenly declare that in order to have power in Russia, you don’t need to be Russian - you just have to be a European ... Strange however.
                      4. Heimdall48 30 July 2015 12: 04 New
                        • -1
                        • 0
                        -1
                        It is very interesting to discuss this issue with you, but aimlessly, since we are people of radically different beliefs)
                        Who took advantage of whom in this case — the West by the Bolsheviks in order to destroy Russia or the Bolsheviks by the west in order to create the most powerful Russian superpower in the world, which launched man into space for the first time in the world? And if the latter, then what exactly is the fault of the Bolsheviks then? What did they do wrong?

                        The German General Staff, Schiff's banking house and others used the Bolsheviks to ruin Russia. The Bolsheviks, in turn, took advantage of the opportunities of benefactors to gain power, and then threw benefactors. And I would not call benefactors the West, these are separate influential national and financial groups, sometimes states, such as Germany, for example.
                        What is the fault of the Bolsheviks? )) For me, it sounds like "what's the fault of the wolf who climbed into the flock and cut out half the herd?" Therefore - I will not answer.
                        Hmm .. What particular foundations did he move away from?

                        Reckless internationalism, when Russia was seen as a match with the help of which it was necessary to kindle a world bonfire. Socialization of women, homosexuality, abortion. Jewish domination and persecution of the Church in the state. level. All these are the foundations of your beloved communion, which Stalin covered up or braked.
                        You blame the Bolsheviks for the fact that the Revolution in Russia is NOT the work of Russians. You suddenly declare that in order to have power in Russia, you don’t need to be Russian - you just have to be a European ..

                        You said that the Romanovs were not Russian, but I replied that the Germans (who were the Romanovs by blood) are the same Russians, if brought up properly. That is, the Romanovs for me are Russians. Do you understand the thread? But the Georgian Stalin or the Trotsky Jew, at least dress them in a short dress from childhood and make them go to church for all church holidays — they will never become Russian.
                      5. Banson 30 July 2015 12: 44 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        The German General Staff, Schiff's banking house and others used the Bolsheviks to ruin Russia.

                        Well - did they ruin Russia? How do we still exist? How did we win at 2MB? How were we the first in the world to launch man into space? Are we ruined? So DO NOT collapse and you say either a lie or you don’t understand what.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        The Bolsheviks, in turn, took advantage of the opportunities of benefactors to gain power, and then threw benefactors.

                        How did they take advantage? What exactly did the German General Staff and Schiff's house provide to the Bolsheviks? Broad popular support or what? After all, it was due to the fact that the ideas of the Bolsheviks at that time shared the bulk the country's population (in many ways, thanks to the efforts of the White Guards, who committed white terror in the territories under their control. Lenin then expressed sincere gratitude to Kolchak because if it weren’t for him, he could not have brought the Bolsheviks, originally indifferent to politics, to the Siberian peasantry), they won the Civil the war. Even the help of the West did not help their opponents.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        What is the fault of the Bolsheviks? )) For me, it sounds like "what's the fault of the wolf who climbed into the flock and cut out half the herd?" Therefore - I will not answer.

                        Again I didn’t understand, okay.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        Reckless internationalism, when Russia was seen as a match with the help of which it was necessary to kindle a world bonfire. Socialization of women, homosexuality, abortion. Jewish domination and persecution of the Church in the state. level. All these are the foundations of your beloved communion, which Stalin covered up or braked.

                        In the 1920 year, abortion was legalized only for narrow groups of women who were contraindicated for childbirth due to health reasons.
                        Homosexuality is a purely royal phenomenon. Not what happened under the Bolsheviks. But it was under the Bolsheviks that they began to fight with him.
                        Also in Tsarist Russia brothels acted quite legitimately i.e. prostitution in RI was completely legal. When the Bolsheviks came to power in the 1917 year, prostitution was banned and all brothels were closed. To this can be added 14-16 hour working day in the Republic of Ingushetia and perfect legal child labor. After the October Revolution of October 29 (November 11) of 1917, a decree of the Council of People's Commissars “On an eight-hour work day” was issued. The decree established that working hours should not exceed 8 working hours per day and 48 hours per week. As for child labor, it was banned by bloody communist ghouls. I draw your attention - all this worked in tsarist Russia where the Russian Orthodox Church was actually merged with the state apparatus and performed the functions of promoting the state ideology (as it is now). You do not know the story. Rather, you know her in a completely perverted form.
                      6. Banson 30 July 2015 12: 44 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        persecution of the Church in the state. level.

                        Do you like what is happening now? The construction of the country by mosques? Hijabs and "Allah Akbar" in the native Russian outback? Numerous conflicts on interfaith and interethnic strife? I do not like. Bolsheviks made Russia secular state and in full accordance with this, they removed the clergy from the state machine. As for the executions and repressions of the priests, they were naturally shot not for faith, but for supporting the old monarchical regime. In fact, priests in the Civil War were on the side of the Belovardeans i.e. against the Bolsheviks. It is crazy for the authorities not to fight their enemies. As already mentioned at that time, the ideas of the Bolsheviks were supported by the bulk of the population of Russia and if you spoke против the bulk of the population i.e. against state power - do not grieve that you were killed or repressed. Did you know that you were walking против the current government and the bulk of the population of your country. And they knew what would follow. And now the same. Go attack the police. Or start calling for the overthrow of power in Russia through the next Maidan. I'll see how it ends. Then it will be possible to stink that it is the bloody Putin regime who repressed you for nothing. Tell your children so.
                      7. Heimdall48 30 July 2015 14: 01 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Almost convinced - I’ll go to the Communist Party to file an application. Joke))
                        Do you like what is happening now? The construction of the country by mosques? Hijabs and "Allah Akbar" in the native Russian outback? Numerous conflicts on interfaith and interethnic strife?

                        Obviously, this is the fruit of a policy that has been pursued for 70 years. It is mediocre to ask .. there are so many select people, as the Communists did - this must be tried. And the fact that then this chaos is covered by the expression - "but we launched a person into space" - this is not even funny. 27 million annihilated citizens during the Great Patriotic War, which the state could not protect (and was obliged to), millions, millions, millions lost during dispossession, talk, famines, purges - what space, what kind of secular state? Well this is complete nonsense. And this nonsense lasted for 70 years - like dust on a historical scale. And someone is still holding onto this dust, breaking spears ... It's sad shorter (
                      8. Banson 30 July 2015 18: 14 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        Obviously, this is the fruit of the policy that has been carried out for 70 years.

                        Listen, you give the impression of a completely inadequate person. Well, that's how Ukrainians are now. Where did you get this stuff? Have you revised the "first" channel? Sit and call the dill zombies, and they themselves are not nearly any better. You pour mud on those to whom you owe EVERYTHING. Even your life.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        Do you like what is happening now? The construction of the country by mosques? Hijabs and "Allah Akbar" in the native Russian outback? Numerous conflicts on interfaith and interethnic strife?
                        Obviously, this is the fruit of the policy that has been carried out for 70 years.

                        Not. This is just the fruit of the policy that is being implemented now. Under the USSR, there was nothing of the kind and could not be that characteristic. Right now, when religion has again grown together with the state machine. Do not lie to yourself or to others.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        It is mediocre to ask .. there are so many select people, as the Communists did - this must be tried.

                        Where and who forged something? Under the USSR, the country's population was steadily increasing, while steadily becoming better and better in a qualitative sense.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        27 million destroyed citizens in World War II

                        Do you blame the Bolsheviks? I will surprise and shock you. 27 million Soviet citizens were destroyed during the German aggression against our country. It’s time to know.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        which the state could not protect (but it was obliged),

                        Like this? Protected. We defeated fascism. The war ended in Berlin with the complete surrender of Germany. What more do you need? Ahhh - 27 million killed. If you didn’t know, dear - on June 22 of the 1941 of the year, the USSR was attacked the most powerful war machine on planet earth. Nobody was stronger than the army then. Even in the historical context, the Wehrmacht then was second only to the Golden Horde and the Soviet Army of the second half of the 20 century. And what do you think that we should overthrow such a force without loss? Smudge like a louse with your little finger? Are you angry about this? Are you out of your mind at all? It was thanks to the Bolsheviks that they won. It is thanks to them. If in the 41 year Hitler had attacked the orderly already decrepit Russian Empire - basically an agrarian country of plows and shovels, neither you nor I would just be gone. How would not be our country.
                        Quote: Heimdall48
                        millions, millions, millions lost during dispossession, waste of time, famines, purges

                        What millions dear? Archival data about the "millions" in the studio. You are a sick person, do you understand? You are just a sick person. Zombied to please the enemies of Russia. You are the same as zombies in Ukraine. Here - all about you. From the beginning to the end:
  • Roman 11 29 July 2015 20: 43 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    Quote: Rastas
    By the 17th year, the state monarchical system had outlived itself.

    Rather, he ceased to perceive reality, people are alive, they need to pay attention. And who will do this, if not the king himself? But after 1905-07 he had a different opinion, but in vain, the people after God always believed in the king, unless of course he was an impostor!
  • Dawn 29 July 2015 20: 40 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    Oh, Natsik monarchists have come.
  • Rastas 29 July 2015 14: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What does the Tips have to do with it? You do not take into account that WWII was a war of mechanized units, therefore the offensive capabilities were higher. Moreover, when I hear such stupid comparisons with the Great Patriotic War, I want to refer such people to the study of German plans in 1914 and 1941. In the 14th year, Germany’s strategy on the Eastern Front was precisely to occupy the border areas and that’s all , because it was hard to move on because of disgusting roads. The main front for the Germans was the West.
    1. Heimdall48 29 July 2015 15: 49 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      What was the Napoleonic Great Army mechanized? Did you have a lot of tank corps? How did she reach Moscow faster than the Wehrmacht? Maybe "disgusting roads" were better then? It’s not a matter of mechanization, but of the generals and the stamina of soldiers. Here at the Soviets with the first there were key problems.
      1. Rastas 29 July 2015 16: 30 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        By the way, about Napoleon. If you look at the map of military operations, you will see that the French army was advancing along the Smolensk Highway, practically without deviating from it due to a simple danger. French generals noted in the memoirs the disgusting quality of the road. In addition, the Russian army would have been defeated in parts even at the border, then Napoleon would not have had to advance. Barclay understood this well. There, the French army was not advancing, but the Russian was retreating, giving rear-guard battles, exhausting the French. And the heads and stamina were always the same. Moreover, the WWII was unfair and criminal in nature, not without reason the most famous books about that war - Remarque, Aldington, Hasek, Barbus, Selin, Hemingway, Zweig curse her. Therefore, the Russian soldier did not really want to fight for some reason.
        1. Heimdall48 29 July 2015 16: 44 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          About the history of World War II in the course. He simply answered your statement that
          offensive capabilities were higher
          Defensive capabilities were also higher in World War II. Everything has its time.
          Therefore, the Russian soldier did not really want to fight for some reason.

          And in the Northern War, which lasted more than 20 years, he wanted to fight? Understood what?
          And in the Napoleonic wars, when half of Europe was filled up with Russian bones - did the Russian soldier want to fight?
          I will answer myself - I did not want to. There simply were no passionate Jewish youths who would explain to the Russian peasant about the bright future and about the "robbery". And in WWII, such circumcised figures were already enough.
          1. Rastas 29 July 2015 17: 07 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            If at least you understand something, then your comparisons with the 18th and the beginning of the 19th century are simply meaningless. Mankind goes through certain stages of its development, therefore, what we did not think about in the 18th century - why we are fighting, for what we are fighting, then at the beginning of the 20th century such questions became relevant.
            1. Heimdall48 29 July 2015 17: 15 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Yes, I understand everything - at the beginning of the 20th century, the mass of every bastard divorced by the state, instead of hanging or making it work, divorced. These are mostly raznochintsy / Jews. It was these figures who wanted a good life and happiness of the people - while they forgot the people to ask what they understand about happiness. That’s all the difference from the 18th century. Then the troublemakers were simply hanged, and in the 20th century the Tsar was a good and cultured man.
              1. Rastas 29 July 2015 17: 37 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Of course, for people like you, the people are ordinary cattle who dare not open their mouths and should only do the will of the master. Everything is clear with you.
          2. Rastas 29 July 2015 17: 13 New
            • -1
            • 0
            -1
            The army is the personification of the political system - and war is the test of the political system and the army. If these two factors do not correspond to the mood and needs of the masses, then they will fail on the exam.
            General A. Ya. Slaschev.
          3. Bagnyuk 29 July 2015 20: 58 New
            • -2
            • 0
            -2
            Quote: Heimdall48
            And in the Northern War, which lasted more than 20 years, he wanted to fight? Understood what?
            And in the Napoleonic wars, when half of Europe was filled up with Russian bones - did the Russian soldier want to fight?
            I will answer myself - I did not want to. There simply were no passionate Jewish youths who would explain to the Russian peasant about the bright future and about the "robbery". And in WWII, such circumcised figures were already enough.

            Bravo Heimdall48 !!! just Bravo !!! to the very point ...
        2. jktu66 30 July 2015 00: 20 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Therefore, the Russian soldier did not really want to fight for some reason.
          Judging by the newsreels and newspapers of those years, in 1914 and in Russia there was an unprecedented patriotic upsurge. More than 2 million St. George cavaliers also says a lot
      2. Banson 30 July 2015 10: 39 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Heimdall48
        What was the Napoleonic Great Army mechanized? Did you have a lot of tank corps? How did she reach Moscow faster than the Wehrmacht? Maybe "disgusting roads" were better then? It’s not a matter of mechanization, but of the generals and the stamina of soldiers. Here at the Soviets with the first there were key problems.

        Well, if Napoleon’s army on foot and on horseback, in the 1812, reached Moscow faster than the Germans in tanks in the 1941, and even managed to take this Moscow (the Germans could not take Moscow to the Great Patriotic War), then whose Russian generals had key problems in the head? Tsarist or Soviet?
        1. Heimdall48 30 July 2015 14: 49 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          then whose Russian generals had key problems in their head? Tsarist or Soviet?

          At that historical moment, the Soviet did not exist, therefore it is obvious that the Tsars did. But this does not mean that the latter are bad and the Soviet ones are wonderful. There, the alignment was different - there was a factor of Napoleon, which outweighed all other nuances.
    2. jktu66 29 July 2015 16: 37 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      You do not take into account that WWII was a war of mechanized units, therefore the offensive capabilities were higher.
      In your opinion, in 1941, how many trucks and horses were in the infantry division of the Wehrmacht and the Red Army division? the chances of an offensive were higher, no doubt, but one should not exaggerate these chances.
      1. Rastas 29 July 2015 17: 17 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And here is an exaggeration of opportunities? I said that comparing the 14th and 41st is stupid. In WWI, the best German units fought on the Western Front, and on the East, except East Prussia, they were used to strengthen the Austro-Hungarian units. And in the Second World War, by the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, the number of Wehrmacht troops totaled 5.5 million. Can this figure be compared with the number of German troops on the Eastern Front during WWII?
  • xan
    xan 29 July 2015 11: 26 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The film was watched about the gunsmith Fedorov. He was amazed that during the defense, the French kept only machine-gun crews in the trenches on the front line, which sharply reduced losses from artillery preparation. And Denikin writes about the fact that the artogony demolished entire trenches with the defenders. Why are such commanders needed? Well, leave you alone machine gunners, let the Germans use up their ammunition, then the main thing is to take out the machine guns, or toss them to hell - you will save the soldier and fighting spirit, the soldier will stop fighting from useless and unnecessary losses.
    1. jktu66 29 July 2015 16: 53 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      He was amazed that during the defense, the French kept only machine-gun crews in the trenches on the front line, which sharply reduced losses from artillery preparation.
      Well, it was in 1916-18, when underground reinforced concrete shelters and forts were built on the western front, and in 1915 there was a huge construction site, and to our requests to distract the Germans with their actions in difficult months for us, tolerant civilizers answered us with silence laughing
  • YaMZ-238 29 July 2015 12: 00 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Do not forget the greatest general N.N. Yudenich, the last commander of the Suvorov school ...
    1. Rastas 29 July 2015 15: 04 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      So Yudenich was the greatest, that he didn’t even pamper from the bast of the Red Army.
      1. jktu66 29 July 2015 16: 42 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        So Yudenich was the greatest, that he didn’t even pamper from the bast of the Red Army.
        To fight with an enemy power is one thing, with compatriots is another. Marshals of civilian alas showed themselves in 1940 with the Finns and in 1941-45 not very smile
        1. Rastas 29 July 2015 17: 41 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Compared the 18th and 40th. In fact, during this time, military affairs stepped far forward. The comparison is incorrect.
        2. Bagnyuk 29 July 2015 21: 01 New
          • -1
          • 0
          -1
          laughing laughing laughing
          Yes, they just crap ... a tiny country with a population of 3 million tapped on a colossus of a colossus ... probably no one knew such a fiasco ... I immediately remember the feat of "Mercury" ... EPT .. what did the red-breasted do with the country ...
      2. Stena 29 July 2015 17: 13 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Why are you lying? You don’t know x..ra, but you’re climbing ... Compare the number of troops among the white and red at the time of the offensive .. There will be about a 10-fold superiority of the red.
        1. Rastas 29 July 2015 17: 39 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          If he is from Suvorov’s school, he should have smashed the enemy under such conditions. Like Suvorov at Ramnik.
        2. xan
          xan 30 July 2015 16: 19 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Stena
          Why are you lying? You don’t know x..ra, but you’re climbing ... Compare the number of troops among the white and red at the time of the offensive .. There will be about a 10-fold superiority of the red.

          Right There, at the front, only a couple of thousand whites fought. Whites in general fought the whole civilian on adrenaline and on anger, fighting capacity is beyond the limit. If the tsar and the rotten tops had not been so ridiculous for the entire WWII, the military officers would strangle the Reds in the bud, as happened in Germany. And so the military had great claims to their own power. Of the half-million Russian officers in the white army, only about one in six fought. If every third, then the red end. And so why fight to again plant through the rotten elite?
  • kojemyakin 29 July 2015 16: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    When the Bolsheviks are scolded for the “disgraceful” Brest Peace, they forget that most of the territories were lost precisely because of the Tsarist regime and the Tsarist generals in 1915.
    1. Rastas 29 July 2015 17: 39 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      What are you saying, now lovers of crunching French bun will bite you.
  • valokordin 29 July 2015 22: 14 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    We should ask the admirers of the autocracy how the Russian army suffered so many defeats and only for economic reasons. Do not compare with the situation of 41 years. In World War I, the Russian army began and suffered a crushing defeat. So what does the Bolsheviks have to do with it? And you, "God save the king," are flashbacks.
  • motorized rifle 29 July 2015 22: 50 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    After the Russo-Japanese War, Kuropatkin’s experience as a loser was not meaningful, but in vain. But in the Russian army, most of the command staff became adherents of Schlichning, with his "strategy of crushing." But the difference was in the quality of the troops! The German school, for example, provided for a sufficiently strong loss of controllability of the troops during the oncoming battle, since the units were inevitably mixed and limited only to command and control, providing the commanders of the units with FULL INDEPENDENCE in solving combat missions. Demanding from the squad commanders the same level of tactical training as from the company commanders! The layered pie didn’t scare them, because they were calm for their own, and the strangers still “belonged” to the attacking side. In the Russian army, controllability of troops was considered the basis of warfare; accordingly, it was its most vulnerable spot, given the fact that the initiative of the junior com team, let’s say so, was not encouraged, and the battle could fall apart into uncontrollable fragments, you understand yourself .. In general, the attack was the prerogative of military action in all warring, but the tools and training of troops were different. These same Turks also fought “Schlichting” and gave the same Yudenich several brilliant victories with their permanent desire to attack. The same was observed with the Russian troops, counterattacks at all costs, including the frontal ones and the introduction into battle in parts. The problem was the lack of their own strategic school, tied to cash human material. The Germans, however, were very calm about the defense (the very rejected experience of Kuropatkin) and believed that if the enemy wants to attack at any cost, he must be given the opportunity. In 1914, the French armies fell into a difficult situation, hoping for an oncoming battle, and the Germans refused it, allowing the French to advance. But the most important thing is that the defeat of the Russian armies in Galicia was inevitable! The fact is that the Gorlitsky breakthrough followed a successful Russian offensive. And each attack has a limit point, pass which, the attacker begins to lose "energy" and a further attack begins to weaken it. The logic "according to Schlichting", after the success of the Russian army in Galicia in 1914, to crush the enemy, the offensive in Moravia and Silesia, which was not feasible for several reasons. As a result, Gorlitsky blow. The same thing happened with Ludendorff advancing in March 1918 or with the Red Army near Warsaw, after the passage of the Vistula. You can list many examples, but also Izvarino finally. That is the so-called suvorovity and kutuzovost of the military leader. The points of ultimate attack must either be calculated or foreseen, and in spite of the apparent victory of the offensive, stop in time and immediately proceed to defense. That was precisely the nature of the final stage of the Second World War. Strategic and operational tactical support fully fall on the senior and senior command personnel, and therefore it is the fault for the completely lost situation.
  • motorized rifle 29 July 2015 23: 12 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    By the way, the Germans and the Austrians also fell on Schlichting, because the chief of the German General Staff was absolutely right, considering the task accomplished. The Germans at that time carried on the offensive also in France and in a smart way, hiding from the bloodless Russian army, they could transfer the liberated units to the west and strengthen the right flank of the Lorraine front with the same Austrians. Instead, they burned them in the Gorlitsky breakthrough and lost the opportunity to beat the French by 1916.
    1. Bagnyuk 30 July 2015 22: 53 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      it’s all moltke’s ram shliffen’s plan was blown away ... he clearly taught the descendants .. the right wing is stronger than the left ... the left is retreating luring .. give Alsace and lorraine where the amphibians obviously are torn by the loss of the last war .. this bait .. the effect of the opening door. This is all understandable ... the performer ruined everything ...
  • Basil_3 10 August 2015 21: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    There are always deviations !!! But there are victories too!
    For example, the Battle of Galicia, according to the results of which we took this very Lviv ...
    In general, we fought well with three states (Austria-Hungary, Germany and Turkey) and our allies on the Western Front together with Germany alone.
  • valdissumy 12 October 2019 15: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    My grandfather participated in these battles as part of the 238th Vetluzhsky Infantry Regiment. June 19, 1915 was taken into Austrian captivity near the city of Lviv.
    1. Town Hall 12 October 2019 15: 03 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: valdissumy
      My grandfather participated in these battles as part of the 238th Vetluzhsky Infantry Regiment. June 19, 1915 was taken into Austrian captivity near the city of Lviv.

      How old are you?
  • valdissumy 12 October 2019 19: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Town Hall
    Quote: valdissumy
    My grandfather participated in these battles as part of the 238th Vetluzhsky Infantry Regiment. June 19, 1915 was taken into Austrian captivity near the city of Lviv.

    How old are you?

    65