Military Review

Breakthrough of the Serbian defense. Storming belgrade

36
The beginning of the Austro-German offensive. Fall of belgrade


During September 1915, in order to mislead the Serbian command, the German artillery bombarded the Serbian coast of the Danube and Sava several times. On October 5-6, 1915, actual artillery preparation by the Mackensen armies began with the aim of preparing the crossing. October 7 Austro-German troops, with the support of the Danube flotillastarted the crossing. From Bosnia, the Austro-Hungarian forces attacked Montenegro, constraining its army so that it could not, like during the 1914 campaign, attack the flank of the Austro-German army.

The crossing of the Austro-German troops near Belgrade turned out to be long and full of obstacles, it was necessary to take a well-fortified and favorable for defense, in its natural position, bridgehead. The crossing was hampered by the need to clear the fairways of both rivers from minefields. In addition, a hurricane began, which lasted more than a week. He dispersed and damaged part of the ships and in some places cut off the landing vanguard from the main forces. However, the advanced units were so reinforced that they withstood the Serbian counterattacks without the support of the main forces. An important role in the success of the Austro-German wax was played by heavy artillery, which suppressed most of the Serbian artillery and destroyed the fortifications. A large role in the crossing was also played by the ships of the Danube Flotilla, which supported the landing troops and suppressed the Serbian batteries with fire. The Austro-German troops used searchlights, which helped to mine mines, dazzle the enemy's searchlights at night, illuminate targets for artillery, and covered troops with a light curtain.

Breakthrough of the Serbian defense. Storming belgrade

Transportation of troops across the Danube

The plan of operations envisaged the transition of the Austro-German across the Drina, Sava and Danube. At the same time, the 3 Army was supposed to cross its right flank, with a force of one and a half divisions, joined by the Bosnian Visegrad group, overcoming the knee formed by Drina and Sava in Machva, as well as forcing Sava with the help of steam ferries under the cover of monitors and armed ships Danube Flotilla. With its center (three divisions of the Austro-Hungarian 14 Corps), on the night of October 3, the 7 Army was to cross the Sava at Progara on ferries and along the military bridge under the guise of the Danube Flotilla ships. On October 7, the troops of the 14 Corps were to erect a pontoon bridge at Bolevtsy. On the left flank, the 26-I Austro-Hungarian division had to cross Sava at Ostruznica to divert the Serbs, and the 22 German reserve corps to force Sava above the Greater Gypsy Island to cover the south-west Serbian capital. German troops were to take part in the capture of Belgrade and to join the 8-m Austro-Hungarian Corps, advancing from Zemlin. An important role at the beginning of the operation was to be played by the Austro-Hungarian Danube Flotilla under the command of 1 captain, rank Karl Lutsich.

The German 11 army had to cross the Danube simultaneously in three columns: at Palanca and Bazias, the 10 reserve corps attacked Ram; at Dunadombo there is the 4 th reserve corps across the Danube island Temestsiget to Kostolaki, and from Kevevara the 3 th reserve corps towards the old Turkish fortress Semendria. Lower down the river near Orsov, the Austrian group of General Foulonn was to operate. Orsov group performed mainly demonstrative task. She had to misinform and forge the Serbian troops. Then she had to establish contact with the Bulgarians and, together with the 1 of the Bulgarian army, occupy the ledge of the Serbian territory in the Danube bend near Kladovo, in order to ensure free navigation on the Danube.


Field Marshal Augusta von Mackensen

The offensive 3 th Austro-Hungarian army. The army of Köwes spent five days on the crossing, as the Serbian army stubbornly defended its capital. Austro-German artillery conducted a powerful artillery preparation. So, at noon on October 6, the heavy artillery of the 8 of the Austro-Hungarian Corps began the preparation of a four-hour hurricane fire from 70 heavy and medium and 90 light guns. This was followed by shrapnel fire, in order to suppress attempts at restoring Serb batteries.

The Austrian corps 8 had to make the longest journey along the water, about 4 km, from the Zemlin region to Belgrade. His headquarters made a mistake in planning and the first echelon of the 59 Infantry Division, instead of the time assigned for the landing in 2 hour 50 minutes. walked to the Serbian coast in 4 hours. And the artillery preparation was completed according to plan exactly at 2 hour. 50 min. Therefore, the Austrian units had to land without the support of artillery. Because of this, and also because of strong Serb resistance, the crossing was difficult. In addition, the rising water in the rivers flooded the island at the mouth of the river. Sava and low-lying parts of the Danube coast, which worsened the landing conditions and did not allow the telegraph cable to be sent to the Serbian coast. The landed vanguard was left without communication and could not inform about the need for artillery support. This led to the fact that the advanced shock battalions suffered significant losses in men and materiel.

Only 9 of October came the steamboats and, following the troops of the 59 Infantry Division, transported the 57 Infantry Division, which allowed the Austro-German troops to finally take control of Belgrade. The strike groups of the Austro-Hungarian troops broke into the city and the fortress of Belgrade from the north, took the citadel and the Vrachar heights.

The 22 German Reserve Corps reached the Sava River in the evening on October 6. Serbian troops were on the heights of Banovo, which so rose above the opposite bank, that approaching the river in the afternoon along the low and strongly swampy left bank of the r. Sava was extremely difficult. Therefore, the troops began to force the river at night. Behind the small islands off the Austrian coast, the pontoons brought up by pioneers (sappers), 10-15 units per each regiment that was being forwarded, were hidden in advance. The landing of troops on the pontoons began after 2 hour. October 7 nights. Already after 15-20 min. the first trains have already landed on the Serbian coast and on the Gypsy island. They were followed by the rest of the troops. While the troops were crossing at night, the losses of the German troops were small, but at dawn, the Serbian artillery intensified and they greatly increased. Having lost up to two-thirds of the pontoons, the German troops were around 8 an hour. in the morning suspended the crossing.

The advance units (approximately one battalion per regiment) had to withstand Serbian counterattacks all day. The Germans and Austrians were saved by the fact that the main forces of the Serbian army had not yet managed to regroup from the Bulgarian direction. Only in the evening the crossing was resumed, but already with heavy losses than on the first day. On October 8, the right-flank 208 th reserve regiment occupied the first line of the Serbian position and went into the rear of the Serbs who defended the Gypsy island, which made them hastily retreat. As a result, the 207 Infantry Regiment was able to capture a serviceable Serbian bridge connecting the Gypsy island with the coast. This facilitated the crossing. Then the German troops launched an assault on the steep Banov Heights. A few hours later, thanks to the strong support of heavy artillery, German troops broke the resistance of the Serbs.

Due to this success 9 October 43-I German reserve division took the suburb of Belgrade - Topchidere. On the same day, after heavy street fighting, Austrian troops took Belgrade. Defending the city, about 5 thousand Serbs perished. Many residents of the capital and people from other places, remembering the excesses of the past Austro-Hungarian invasion, when they did not stand on ceremony with civilians, robbed, raped and killed, left their homes and joined the retreating army. The disaster began. The country collapsed before our eyes.


Thus, the Austro-German troops on the third day of the operation took the Serbian capital - Belgrade. However, the crossing at Belgrade was delayed and was carried out instead of one in three days. The incorrect calculation of the crossing of the Austro-German command could have turned the whole enterprise into failure if it were not for the stubbornness of the Germans who had broken the Serbs with great losses for themselves, as well as the weakness of the Serbian army in the Belgrade sector and the complete superiority of the Austro-German forces in heavy artillery.


Source: Korsun N. Balkan Front of World War 1914-1918

The onset of the 11 of the German army. The crossing of the 11 of the German army was prepared in the spring and summer of 1915. The Austrian sappers carried out reconnaissance of the river, completed the strengthening of positions on its bank, fixed the roads and bridges. Intelligence revealed that the section from the mouth of the river is more convenient for crossing. Karas do Baziasa, which allowed the concealed concentration of troops and boats. The crossing was planned at once in four places: the mouth of the r. Karasa, Snake Island, estuary Nera and Bazias. It was planned to build a bridge using Snake Island.

All these places have been carefully studied and prepared for the crossing taking into account weather conditions, the state of the water level and the likely actions of the Serbian troops. The mouths of the Karas and Nera rivers were cleared of sediments and mines, and their fairway was submerged by subversive works so that boats and pontoons could pass there. In addition, the engineering services prepared a dense network of roads in the places of the initial location of the troops, put signs for the troops and set up observation posts. A special feature of the landing of troops in this area was a hurricane, which interrupted regular shipping for several days and interfered with sweeping operations.

Before the start of the operation, the Austrian sappers raised eight barges that had sunk beyond the Ponavica island, and a ship sailed by the Serbian artillery at Art. Moldavians. Barges with great effort raised and fixed, putting them off the coast of the island of Ponyavitsa under the guise of a forest and bushes. The steamer was also raised and transported to the island of Ponavitsa, covered with trees. In addition, the Germans at night moved around the 100 semi-pontoons, which were lowered along the r. Karasu to its mouth, and then on the river. The Danube to the Snake Island, where they were dragged to the shore and covered. The crossing was also provided by Austrian rowing ships, divisional and hull German bridge ferries.

The immediate goal of the German troops after the crossing was the capture of the area of ​​Goritsy and the massif of Orlyak (south of Goritsy), and then the border of Klitschevan, Zatonie. The advanced troops carried with them ammunition for five days, food for six days and large stocks of engineering equipment. It was a very sensible decision, since the elements that were clearing up led to a break in the crossing.

Thus, the Austrians and the Germans carefully prepared for the crossing of the water barrier. Moreover, all these preparations were made so covertly that the October 7 ferry turned out to be unexpected for the Serbs.

6 October 1915 German artillery began shelling the Serbian positions and by the morning of October 7 the fire was brought to the degree of a hurricane. Despite the powerful fire of almost 40 batteries, which lasted until the landing of the forward echelon of the 10 Corps, advancing from Snake Island, the Serbs, after the Germans moved the artillery fire deep into Rama. By the evening of October 7, two regiments of the 103 Infantry Division were transferred.

Then the German troops had to go through difficult days. 8 and 9 October was pouring rain, which turned into a storm. Until October 17 lasted a hurricane. At this time, all the means of crossing, except the steamer, were inactive. A number of boats was damaged by hurricane wind. At the same time, the Serbs were firing artillery fire, and went on the counter, trying to throw the Germans into the river. The ship with great difficulty completed the transfer of troops 103-th division. Only additional stocks of ammunition, food and various equipment allowed the Germans to survive. The storm ended only on October 17 and the remaining troops of the 10 of the German corps were transferred to the other side. October 21 Germans put two bridges.

Thus, careful preparation of the operation allowed the 11 of the German army to successfully force the river, despite the 8-day hurricane. The Germans, with the help of powerful crossing means, without building a bridge, transferred such large and well-equipped units that they could repel all enemy counterattacks and hold out until the main forces approached.



Further offensive Mackensen troops

The Serbian command began a regrouping of forces from the Bulgarian direction to the north with the aim of creating a strong defense on the way of the Austro-German troops. Austro-German troops, who lingered at the crossing more than planned, by October 18 were able to advance on the southern bank of the r. Danube only 10 km. The 19 th Austro-Hungarian corps, advancing on the Bosnian direction, overcoming the stubborn resistance of the Montenegrin army, also advanced slowly.

On October 21, the avant-gardes of Mackensen’s armies were on the Ripanj line, Caliste, and the Austro-Hungarian troops, who had crossed the Lower Drina, reached Shabac. The onset of the Austro-German troops went with great difficulty, especially due to the lack of communication lines. The available roads were spoiled by the autumn rains. The Austro-German troops were no longer delayed by the resistance of the Serbian troops, but by the dirt and the roads that were filled with people.

Especially difficult was the 3 th Austro-Hungarian army of Köwess, which is worse than the 11 th army, overcame the resistance of the Serbs. The German High Command offered the Austrians to strengthen the 3 Army at the expense of troops from the Italian Front. However, the Austrians were afraid of a new offensive by the Italian army and refused to the Germans. Indeed, the 18 of October began the third offensive of the Italian army (the third battle of the Isonzo). However, the Italians could not help Serbia. All the attacks of the Italian divisions crashed against the powerful defense of the Austrian army. The Austrians were ready for an enemy attack. Italians put a lot of soldiers, but advanced slightly. In November, the Italian army launched the fourth offensive against the Isonzo. Fierce fighting continued until December, all attempts by the Italian army were unsuccessful. For the breakthrough of strong Austrian defense, which took place in the highlands, the Italians had catastrophically little heavy artillery.

On the left flank of the Austro-German Army Group Mackensen, the situation was also difficult. The weak Austrian group of Fulonna, located at Orsov, failed to force the Danube at the beginning of the operation. As a result, the Austrians could not immediately provide the junction between the 11 of the German and 1 of the Bulgarian armies, and the transportation of various supplies and materials along the Danube to Bulgaria. And the Bulgarian army depended on supplies from Austria and Germany.

Only on October 23, the Austrians near the city of Orsov were able to organize powerful artillery preparation, with the participation of 420-mm guns. Hurricane artillery fire destroyed the Serbian fortifications. Under the cover of strong artillery and machine-gun fire (the width of the Danube at Orsov allowed effective machine-gun fire on the other bank), Austrian troops were able to force the river and gain a foothold. After the arrival of reinforcements, the Austrians continued the offensive and captured the necessary bridgehead. Thus, with the help of strong artillery and machine-gun fire, the Austro-Hungarian group of Fulonna was able to break the resistance of the Serbian forces and force the Danube.



Bulgaria enters the war

October 15 Bulgarian troops crossed the border of Serbia. At first, the Bulgarian troops met with fierce resistance from the Serbs and advanced rather slowly. The Bulgarians for a long time unsuccessfully attacked the well-fortified positions of the Serbian army on the r. Timok and north of Pirot. But on the left flank, Bulgarian troops were able to raid the Vranja station, where they destroyed the railway and telegraph, cutting off Serbia’s connection with the Allied forces in Salonika.

By October 21, the Bulgarian Army 1 continued to storm the Serbian positions. The right wing and center of the Bulgarian army was on the river. Timok between Zaichar and Knyazhevatz, and the left wing fought at Pirot. Only October 25 Bulgarian troops forced the Serbs to withdraw for Timok. The 2-I Bulgarian army easily reached the area of ​​Vranja and Kumanov, and with its left flank it intercepted the r. Vardar in the area of ​​Veles. Thus, the Bulgarian troops broke the link of the Serbian army and the allied expeditionary corps in Salonika. This put the bulk of the Serbian army at risk.



To be continued ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
1915 Campaign
Military plans of the Entente and the Central Powers for 1915 year
Death of the 20 Russian Corps
"Rubber War" in the Carpathians
Battle for Prasnysh
Italian "jackal" enters the war
Battle of the Isonzo
Second Battle of the Isonzo
Germany turns east
Bosphorus bait for Russia
Gorlitsky breakthrough
The defeat of the 3 Army Radko-Dmitriev. The death of the 48 "Steel" division of General Kornilov
Departure of Russian armies from Galicia. Loss of Przemysl and Lviv
The great retreat of the Russian army
The fall of Warsaw
Fall of the Newgeorg Fortress
The great retreat of the Russian army was the harbinger of the 1917 disaster of the year.
1915 Campaign of the Year on the Caucasus Front
Solution of the “Christian Question” in Turkey during the First World War
Battle for van
Alashkert operation
Hamadan operation
Sventsian breakthrough
Completion of the 1915 campaign of the year on the Russian front: the battle for Lutsk and Chartoryisk. Operation on the river. Strypa
As England and France set up Russia under the German ram
Dardanelles operation
Dardanelles: defeat at sea
Dardanelles trap
"It was the devil's feast ..." Sturm Gallipoli
Battle of Critia. New losses of the allied fleet
Landing operation in the gulf of Suvla
"Damned Dardanelles!" They will be our grave. ” Defeat of the allied army
Bulgarian "bros" enter the war
How to defeat Serbia
36 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. parusnik
    parusnik 15 October 2015 07: 55 New
    +3
    Bulgaria enters the warTogether with the best "friends" of the Slavs .. Germans and Turks ... they call it World War II ...
    1. mishastich
      mishastich 15 October 2015 09: 43 New
      +1
      "Brothers."
    2. pytar
      pytar 15 October 2015 09: 55 New
      +2
      Nothing to be surprised. Serbia entered the list of Bulgaria’s enemies as far back as 1885, when it vilely attacked the back of Bulgaria, while the newly created Bulgarian army was standing at the border with Turkey, waiting for the invasion of the Turks. This was the first war between Bulgaria and Serbia and in it the Serbs indisputably were aggressors. In this war, the Bulgarians defeated the head of the Serbs. Only the ultimatum of Austria-Hungary forced the Bulgarians to stop their advance towards Belgrade. During the Balkan war in 1912-1913, the Bulgarian army defeated the Turks and reached 30 km. from Constantinople, Serbia and Greece didn’t show up in a good way. Having concluded the secrets of the treaty among themselves and violating the general union treaty, they occupied Macedonia that did not wait for international arbitration for the arising disputes. A jackal Romania was also connected to them, whose troops attacked surrounded Bulgaria from the north through the Danube. Ksati, until that moment in their entire history, Bulgaria and Romania had never fought among themselves. Dehydrated and surrounded on all sides, Bulgaria was defeated, although even in such a catastrophic situation, the Bulgarian troops managed to pat the "allies" cool. After a war called the Inter-Union War (1913), Serbia, Greece and Romania occupied large territories, densely populated for centuries by the Bulgarian population. The territories to which back in 1878 after the Liberation Russo-Turkish War under the San Stefan Treaty between Turkey and RUSSIA were created Bulgaria! It is quite clear that for Bulgaria, the Emancipation of the crippled parts of the Bulgarian people has become the primary and basic national idea! For this, the Bulgarians, consider their entry into the First World War, naturally and call this war a SPARELY FREEDOM WAR! The Bulgarians did not set any conquest goals and did not have the task of conquering the territories and lands unpopulated with the Bulgarian population. For that, Bulgaria did not accept Russia's proposal for compensation from the Turkish territory if it enters the war on the side of the Entente. So, WWI is really a fair war for Bulgaria!
      1. V.ic
        V.ic 15 October 2015 12: 45 New
        +2
        Quote: pytar
        So, WWI is really a fair war for Bulgaria!

        Shoot those who shed their blood on the Balkan mountains for your freedom from the Turks, do you call this a fair war? Then those of you who, along with the Nazis, shed the blood of the Serbs in WWII, probably "holy people"?
      2. Aleksander
        Aleksander 15 October 2015 13: 04 New
        0
        Quote: pytar
        Serbia and Greece didn’t show up in a good way. Having concluded the secrets of the treaty among themselves and violating the general union treaty, they occupied Macedonia that did not wait for international arbitration for the arising disputes. The jackal Romania, whose troops attacked surrounded Bulgaria from the north through the Danube, also joined them.


        Enemies are right all around - Serbia, Greece, Romania, and Turkey, but Bulgaria is white-fluffy and the most fair wink
        "You do not ask yourself the question, why is it that your friends turn into enemies so often? After all, it cannot be that all are bad (!), But only you are good? So ... Until you understand that in many ways you are creating your own enemies, nothing good will happen to you. You will continue to “make” enemies for yourself, and you will continue to reproach and scold them for betrayal and even for all sins there! "(WITH) wink
      3. 97110
        97110 15 October 2015 16: 50 New
        +1
        Quote: pytar
        Bulgarians did not set any conquest goals

        With the German king? In, gives "brother."
  2. stoqn477
    stoqn477 15 October 2015 11: 08 New
    0
    Quote: parusnik
    Bulgaria enters the warTogether with the best "friends" of the Slavs .. Germans and Turks ... they call it World War II ...

    If you got hit on the back of them, you would not say so. In the Balkans, who are Slavs and who are not, does not matter. We have problems with each other 1000 years ago, not only out of 100.
    1. vrach
      vrach 15 October 2015 12: 33 New
      +3
      Maybe so - 477. Only in your problems with each other to find the one to blame is difficult. And what about strategic planning, how is it that even Romania with whom the Bulgarians did not fight wanted to pinch a bit of territory? Around enemies? And maybe all the same brain turn on? Or at least respect and the desire to comply with the rules. It is interesting to us that Bulgaria is still acting to its own detriment - it refused from the South Stream, from the pipeline to Thessaloniki, it also didn’t work with the nuclear power plant. You bratushki first enemies themselves.
      1. pytar
        pytar 15 October 2015 13: 00 New
        +1
        The answer to your question is ... geography. Just look at the map and understand what the speech is about. Bulgaria is the center of the Balkans, and the center of conflict. The Cross Way, where all the Great Forces had and have interests. Due to the geopolitical situation in Europe from 1978 to 1918, neither Serbia, nor Greece, nor Romania could expand territorially in other directions, except for Bulgaria. Although, for Serbia, the natural direction was in the northwest, where the territories inhabited by ethnically closer Slavs from the Serbo-Croatian ethnic group, then part of Austria-Hungary. For Romania, the same territories were Transylvania and Moldova, also under the control of Austria-Hungary and Russia. And for Greece, it was the coast of Asia Minor and the islands of the Aegean, which are part of the Ottoman Empire. It is clear that for all of the Balkan states it would be more realistic to bite as much territory as possible with Bulgaria, which was weaker than the aforementioned Empires, and, in addition to its geographical position, united completely different countries of conquering interests. Those. all pre-deliveries, so that Serbia, Greece and Romania, united against Bulgaria were obvious. By such a move, some Great Powers also encouraged them. Fact. As for the South Stream, you are very mistaken. Not everything is as simple with him as they say in Russian media. I myself and in the service have worked and am working on this project. So I’m in the know, for sure! But the topic is not there, so I’ll refrain from commenting.
        1. pytar
          pytar 15 October 2015 13: 39 New
          +2
          Alexandersorry! My response was to your comment. Just forgot to click on the / quote / button. repeat Ksati, I see what you write under the Romanian flag! So can you answer me, when in the history of Friendship was Romanian? And why did Russia in 1878 surrender Romania to Northern Dobruji, despite the fact that Romania did not want to eat the land, but wanted Bessarabia? Can you answer why, in 1913 / Inter-Union War / Romania attacked Bulgaria, with the fact that the state’s wallpapers had never fought among themselves and had no territorial claims to one another?
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Aleksander
            Aleksander 15 October 2015 20: 54 New
            0
            Quote: pytar
            Ksati, I see what you write under the Romanian flag! So can you answer me, when in the history of Friendship was Romanian?


            Moldavian flag, I am writing from the Bessarabian province of the Republic of Ingushetia. Still answer my (yours two days ago) questions.
            1. pytar
              pytar 15 October 2015 22: 55 New
              +2
              Clear. The flags here are small and did not figure it out first. The answer to your questions was a little higher ... higher than my previous comment. Probably not seen. "The answer to your question is given by ... geography. Just look at the map and understand what the speech is about. Bulgaria, this is the center of the Balkans, and therefore the center of conflicts. Crossroads ..." Asked you questions too! I will be glad to know your answers or opinion. WITH
        2. vrach
          vrach 15 October 2015 18: 03 New
          +1
          Let's still Disraili remember? The English Prime Minister who was the FIRST killed the plans for the implementation of Great Bulgaria after the 1887-1888 war. I will repeat the FIRST, thus diminishing Skobelev's achievements. A Russian general who prepared the Bulgarian army well after that. And Pitar? Let's say together the Anglo-Saxons are scoundrels and the root cause of Bulgarian misfortunes. BUT? Or are you now the Anglo-Saxons more Slavs?
          1. pytar
            pytar 15 October 2015 18: 37 New
            +3
            Dear vrach! Respect to you from me! hi The fact is not subject to any doubt.that the REASON FOR THE BULGARIAN TERRORISM IS EXACTLY THE ANGLOSAX! They are the eternal enemies of all Slavs! Divide and rule! So rule the world! But that world is already changing! Not long for them to rule!
          2. Rastas
            Rastas 15 October 2015 19: 29 New
            -1
            Dear connoisseur of the history of the Balkans. Before labeling, read Zadokhin and Nizovsky’s book, The Powder Cellar of Europe. Everything there is easily explained why Bulgaria turned out to be the enemy of Serbia. Everyone there was "good."
    2. 97110
      97110 15 October 2015 16: 57 New
      -1
      Quote: stoqn477
      If you got hit on the back of them, you would not say so

      This "brother" writes in RuNet! Afiget! Really, they do not see the coast. Tell the Germans about "a blow to the back." They are in the person of your king-father the authors of your national disaster. If not scrap, look at the behavior of ukroamerikansov over the reporting 2 years. Again. You do not recognize yourself at the beginning of the 20th century? Only instead of the Germans, the Americans.
      1. pytar
        pytar 15 October 2015 17: 30 New
        +2
        stoqn477 right! And you Afigey, as you want. Clearly, you are not happy with the facts, but this is your problem. Sorry.
  3. pytar
    pytar 15 October 2015 13: 20 New
    +3
    Quote: V.ic
    Quote: pytar
    So, WWI is really a fair war for Bulgaria!

    Shoot those who shed their blood on the Balkan mountains for your freedom from the Turks, do you call this a fair war? Then those of you who, along with the Nazis, shed the blood of the Serbs in WWII, probably "holy people"?

    Did you happen to study at an American college? bully / joke / Since you change the REASON with the RESULT! In 1877, Russia came to the Balkans with a liberating mission! It was a JUST WAR! And in 1915-16, Russia came to the Balkans to help OUR ENEMIES! Those our enemies, who a year ago occupied the earth for thousands of years, populated by the Bulgarians! Those lands that RUSSIA HAVE RELEASED from the Turks in 1878 G.! Yes, look at the map, where is Bulgaria Bulgaria, about which Russia has signed an agreement with the Ottomans in San Stefano! When in general in history before 1878 Mr. Dobruzhda was Romanian ??? Never! How did the populations in Macedonia and Thrace determine themselves, in PLEBISCITA in 1870, about belonging to the Bulgarian exarchy? This is all Bulgaria, whether you like it or not! I’ll tell you, as I replied to another discussion on a similar topic: "Gentlemen ... I am Russophile to the core of my bones and love Russia, but if you come to my house to kill my children, parents and relatives, I will be blessed with what you ... Russians or Romanians, Turks or Serbs! I will defend myself and fight with all my strength! " Clear? And the topic of WWII is also interesting and also ambiguous. But here is the topic of WWII.
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 15 October 2015 13: 59 New
    +2
    Russians are really sick with the "idea of ​​Slavism" people. Worn with her for several centuries. And our brothers Slavs are much easier. They no longer remember that they are Slavs. And if they remember, they are embarrassed by this and try to hide this accessory away. Where profitable, there really is. It’s not them, this is the situation. They are not bad, they are all bad.
  6. pytar
    pytar 15 October 2015 14: 23 New
    +4
    Quote: vladimirvn
    Russians are really sick with the "idea of ​​Slavism" people. Worn with her for several centuries. And our brothers Slavs are much easier. They no longer remember that they are Slavs. And if they remember, they are embarrassed by this and try to hide this accessory away. Where profitable, there really is. It’s not them, this is the situation. They are not bad, they are all bad.

    Vladimir, I propose that you deliberately use a concept such as the "idea of ​​Slavism," instead of Panslavism. I think there is no need to explain what UTB is Panslavism and why it is developing in the Russian Empire after 1830. You yourself can find information about this. I don’t know what you mean by the “idea of ​​Slavism”? After all, the Slavic peoples are many and they have different ideas and understandings, including about "Slavism"! Russia does not have a monopoly over these ideas, nor does it have a monopoly over the idea of ​​Panslavism. Depending on how one or another action needs to be substantiated, states “take on arms” one or another idea. With Russia, too. Unfortunately for all of its history, Slavs are disunity and very often Slavs fight among themselves. This is not only a "Slavic disease", but most of the other Mega-ethnic groups have the same thing. I do not share your opinion that the Slavs forgot that they are Slavs. Neither Poles, nor Czechs, nor Serbs, nor Slovaks, nor Bulgarians, nor Croats have forgotten! Conflicts between him do not interfere with the Slavs being recognized as such. And I will tell you frankly that I do not consider any of the Slavs to be “more Slavic” or “more correct” than others. It’s just that we, as by nature, lack the ability to understand each other. Understand and perceive a different point of view. Make compromises. To look for something that brings us together, and not focus on what disconnects us. It’s impossible to exchange a story as it was - good or bad! What happened can’t be changed! But we all need to look for common ground and common ways to resolve conflicts! Solves this problem, in the future it will probably be possible, some form of pan-Slavic unification! What is in the interests of our countries and peoples! Whether we are reasonable enough to understand it or not, I don’t know. But as the first step in this direction, I believe that ALL of us should stop reproaching each other and SHOULD STOP KINDING HATE BETWEEN US! Even in our comments here, we must respect and avoid insults and curses! BECAUSE WE HAVE GENERAL ENEMIES! In general, I want to apologize here and shy if someone, by emotions, offended on an ethnic or religious principle.
  7. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 15 October 2015 14: 26 New
    0
    Quote: pytar
    BECAUSE OUR ENEMIES ARE COMMON!

    Let me ask you, who do you consider our common enemies?
  8. pytar
    pytar 15 October 2015 14: 38 New
    +3
    Quote: vladimirvn
    Quote: pytar
    BECAUSE OUR ENEMIES ARE COMMON!

    Let me ask you, who do you consider our common enemies?

    The supra-national megacorporations and the forces behind it. All those who want to make a managed biomass out of humanity. Those who contribute to the coming of the Antichrist and want to drown humanity into impenetrable darkness. Anglo-Saxons, as the main executors of the will of the same Antichrist. Although the Anglo-Saxons themselves, are the subject of manipulation. They are one of the means to achieve the goals of the Antichrist, and I look at them at some level, as at his sacrifice. I have nothing against them, as peoples or as people. (I am writing the Antichrist as a conditional concept.) And their fifth column, which has penetrated in our societies.
    1. Rastas
      Rastas 15 October 2015 19: 51 New
      0
      Well. Before that, they wrote good thoughts, and then they rolled down to the Antichrist. Who reported to you that the Anglo-Saxons hired the Antichrist?))))) Everything is quite simpler. England, along with the Netherlands, experienced the revolution before Europe in the 17th century, as a result of which they switched from feudalism to capitalism, which had a beneficial effect on the economy. Holland was later defeated, and England became the sole leader, a manufactory of the world, as it was called. And all of her confrontations are upholding and conquering new markets for their goods. Learn the English economic thought of Smith, Ricardo, Mill, then you will understand.
      1. pytar
        pytar 15 October 2015 20: 21 New
        +3
        Rastas, you still haven’t said anything that I didn’t know before. “Good” or “bad” seems to me my thoughts, this is your subjective opinion. According to your criteria, I should evaluate your thoughts as "bad" and that you have slipped into a purely materialistic explanation. And we are talking about much more complex processes. Maybe it’s worth it to think it over, but is everything that comes from the world so simple? Maybe life is not all about economics and not everything is so primitive? Maybe the eternal struggle between the Forces of Darkness and the Forces of Light really takes place? Indeed, modern science, already somehow begins to hint about the existence of the Soul and the presence of some kind of Higher setting over everything we see! The topic is interesting, but it is hardly worth discussing it here. In short ... I wish you good health and enlightenment! hi
        1. Rastas
          Rastas 15 October 2015 20: 56 New
          -1
          Yes, I consider myself a pragmatist. And just the opinion that the Anglo-Saxons are agents of the Antichrist is just a very simplified idea of ​​the processes going on in the world. And frankly, better than Marx, no one has explained these processes. In short, look for class interests in any war.
  9. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 15 October 2015 14: 44 New
    0
    roekty-rf-v-strane-byli-ostanovleny-v-polzu-ssha.html
    Quote: pytar
    Anglo-Saxons, as the main executors of the will of the same Antichrist.

    Well, yes, and here are the facts to confirm your words. "Prime Minister of Bulgaria: Russian energy projects in the country were stopped in favor of the United States."
    Russian energy projects in Bulgaria - the construction of the Burgas-Alexandroupolis oil pipeline, the Belene nuclear power plant and the South Stream gas pipeline - were stopped in favor of the United States. This was announced today at a conference of the American Chamber of Commerce by Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov.
    "We recognized the military wing of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, we stopped the three largest Russian projects, we are stopping Russian planes over the sea," the Bulgarian Prime Minister said. In his opinion, when there are problems, Bulgaria and the United States should be together. “Together we are one, we are friends and that’s why I can talk to you that way,” he added at a meeting with American diplomats and businessmen. Http://oko-planet.su/politik/newsday/296103-premer -bolgarii-energop
    1. pytar
      pytar 15 October 2015 14: 49 New
      +3
      Why are you surprised? Bulgaria after the collapse of the Social Bloc, was in the category of defeated countries. The United States introduced its administration and occupied the country. Bulgaria cannot lead any independent policy, as it is a protectorate of the West. Everything is under gesture control. Intelligence services track and suppress any attempt at dissent or pro-Russian. Pro-Russian movements (and there are many such in Bulgaria) are under constant pressure. We were the most faithful ally of the USSR. And the Bulgarians still remain Russfils in their overwhelming minority. For this, the West carefully monitors that the situation does not go beyond control. A powerful, highly efficient system monitors everything.
  10. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 15 October 2015 15: 09 New
    0
    We are the same, sort of appointed defeated, but somehow we did not agree with this. I do not believe that in your situation, nothing can be done in legal, legal ways. If there are a lot of people like you, why can't you hear and see?
    Quote: pytar
    Bulgaria after the collapse of the Social Bloc, was in the category of defeated countries
  11. pytar
    pytar 15 October 2015 15: 35 New
    +3
    Quote: vladimirvn
    We are the same, sort of appointed defeated, but somehow we did not agree with this. I do not believe that in your situation, nothing can be done in legal, legal ways. If there are a lot of people like you, why can't you hear and see?
    Quote: pytar
    Bulgaria after the collapse of the Social Bloc, was in the category of defeated countries

    Well, Russia has been appointed many times as defeated, but always mistaken! bully I can’t understand why the enemies of Russia do not read history! what You know ... In Bulgaria, there is a very active protest action against the United States and NATO. Mass manifestations, rallies and protests, statements by Bulgarian public men, scientists and politicians in support of Russia are constantly there! The West understands perfectly well that the Bulgarians will not go against Russia, and that Bulgaria is the weakest chain in the network of anti-Russian activities of NOTs. The fact that these events are not reflected in the Bulgarian media is understandable, but I constantly monitor Russian media! It is surprising that in most of them, not a word ... At that time, materials were constantly published, with an openly anti-Bulgarian orientation. We are talking about rough, stitched with "white ropes" articles and publications, directed not so much against the Bulgarian authorities, but against the Bulgarian people. The question is raised - how much is the “Russian” media really? Who controls them, who sets the tone for them and sets tasks? In Russian forums and networks, materials abound against Bulgaria! If there appears some kind of objective commentary or material trying to give a different opinion, the State Department trolls immediately attack him! Mashchab anti-Bulgarian propaganda ru-net pinches! I understand what is at stake ... They are trying to form a negative public opinion among the Russians. It was not possible to set up the Bulgarians against the Russians, as for example they managed with the Ukrainians, and hastily trying to set up the Russians against the Bulgarians! Yes, to cause the same response and the Bulgarians to Russian! Information war! Here on the site "Military Review" is the same! Primitive, atavistic trolling to dullness!
  12. pytar
    pytar 15 October 2015 15: 57 New
    +3
    To the enemies of the Slavs, I want to say Yasnenko: With the acquisition of Macedonia independence, at the end of the 90, ALL disputed issues between Bulgaria and Serbia disappeared! The century-old “Apple of contention” - Macedonia, got the opportunity to decide its own destiny! We consider it fair and logical! Bulgaria was the first to recognize the Republic of Macedonia as an independent state! At the household level for a long time, relations between our peoples are friendly. We hope that for the Slavic countries and peoples on the Balkans, finally the time comes for fruitful cooperation!
  13. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 15 October 2015 17: 22 New
    +1
    pytar Thanks for the reasoned discussion.
  14. pytar
    pytar 15 October 2015 17: 25 New
    +2
    Quote: 97110
    Quote: pytar
    Bulgarians did not set any conquest goals

    With the German king? In, gives "brother."

    And then the king? As far as I understand the genealogy of other Balkan states, kings and kings were non-native. True, I was not interested in the Serbian Peter I Karadzhorzhevich. I was always wondering why the Russian Emperor Alexander III, forcing the Bulgarian Prince Alexander I Batemberg to abdicate and put Ferdinand of Sax-Koburgotsky as a result! After all, Alexander Betemberg, served in the Russian army and is a relative of the Russian emperor! More Russophile Prince for Bulgaria than Batenberg hardly could Russia find! They removed their Batenberg and got the Russophobe Ferdinand! But whatever it was, we did not choose our Kings after 1878.
    1. Bagatur
      Bagatur 15 October 2015 18: 13 New
      +1
      Because Russia believed that Alexander I should be a puppet and fill everything that would be ordered to him from Petersburg! Russian diplomats in Bulgaria behaved as in Transdanubia, which led to a conflict not only with the princes and with most of the Bulgarian society. So Zakhari Stoyanov, one of the organizers of the uprising in 1876 and led the undergraduate union in 1885 said: “When the Turks hit us in the face it hurt, but when the liberators and the Slavs did it, it’s impossible anymore ..” And this man was a Russophile and a Russian politics turned him into his enemy. Another Bulgarian era told the Russian ambassador: “Did you free us from the Turks, who will free us from you now?” After 1885 and a victorious war with Serbia, Russia made a bid to overthrow Prince Alexander I, too rebellious and thought about Bulgarian interest more than p sky ... August 8/9, 1886, Russophile officers (agents of Russia) overthrew the prince and he left the country, and history is the most confusing here. Not only soritsa with Russia, the Bulgarians chose Prince Voldemar of Denmark, two-sibling the Russian empress but ... Alexander III didn’t accept “sowing". Russia offered the Bulgarians one Georgian, Nikolai Mingreli, he sold her his principality to him and lived on a pension from Russia! This has come too much, and Bulgarian Russophiles could not imagine a Caucasian prince like a Bulgarian prince! And then, is it not by chance that Ferdinand’s poplin is accidentally in one nativity scene in Vienna ... Russia tore off its relations with Bulgaria and restored already in 1894 ... Russia and her bad politics made Coburg-Gotha become a Bulgarian monarch!
      1. pytar
        pytar 15 October 2015 18: 40 New
        +2
        Respect Bagatur! hi Thanks for the clarifications! good
  15. moskowit
    moskowit 15 October 2015 19: 28 New
    0
    You see, the author's presentation of dry historical facts provoked a fierce discussion of supporters and opponents. It is very good that respected commentators so vividly, sometimes overly, discuss historical issues. But it is not very correct that the comrades look at the ongoing actions of a hundred years ago from today's position, designing, as it were, the situation and circumstances of that time into today's reality.
  16. pytar
    pytar 15 October 2015 19: 59 New
    +2
    Quote: Rastas
    Dear connoisseur of the history of the Balkans. Before labeling, read Zadokhin and Nizovsky’s book, The Powder Cellar of Europe. Everything there is easily explained why Bulgaria turned out to be the enemy of Serbia. Everyone there was "good."

    Do you know how many studies, books, studios were written on these issues? Thousands? Why, consider the author of the first instance quoted by you? I actually read hundreds of different scientific studies on the topic. But you know ... I take everything for mixing and compare with those facts that are undeniable, obvious! And such facts, quite a lot! Someone likes, someone not. Not my problem. So I make up my mind. Ksati, I don’t put labels on anyone, although in the comments here some “experts in history” have rather funny “camps”! lol Come on! Let it be fun! laughing I myself have no claim to a "connoisseur of history." You probably thought so. It happens! People are wrong. wink