Programmed rout

Programmed rout



Defeat in a war or defeat at some time during the war often has an explanation. As a rule, the head of state, defense industry, foreign policy, military leadership, etc. can be guilty here. This article deals with completely unexplained actions or inactions of the military leadership of the Red Army in the pre-war period, that is, since March 1939. But before proceeding to the presentation of these actions or inactions, let us briefly recall some of the main military-political events of the two pre-war years.

HITLER ALL DECEIVED

March 1939 should be considered as an important starting point. This month, Hitler deceived his partners in the autumn negotiations in Munich and occupied the Czech Republic. In contrast to the lands previously annexed to Germany, Hitler first occupied the territory with a non-German population, and also very important geopolitically and economically. The leaders of Great Britain and France realized that they were thrown in Munich, as they say now, and began to take emergency measures. Britain immediately introduced universal military duty, and France immediately increased the service life of conscription. The situation in the world began to quickly heat up. That same spring, fascism won the Spanish Civil War.

The Soviet Union also realized that the time had come for decisive action to strengthen the country's defense. Purges, arrests and executions in the country has become much less. Began a rapid increase in the size of the army. At the same time, Stalin began to pursue an active foreign policy. In the summer of 1939, a very successful, albeit risky, military campaign was conducted against the Japanese at Khalkhin Gol.

On September 1, 1939, after attacking Poland, Germany launched World War II. On the same day, we are adopting a new law on universal conscription. And on September 17, the Red Army troops begin the liberation of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus, or, as others believe, the occupation of the eastern regions of Poland. The main thing is not in terms, but that it was a necessary military-political decision, even from Churchill's point of view. The next year, the USSR managed to get 1940 in time, that is, before the onset of the spring thaw, to end the war with Finland, and then, taking advantage of the situation, that is, Germany’s defeat of France, join the Baltic States, Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina.

Unprecedented attention in these years, Stalin pays designers and manufacturers weapons. And a completely backward economically country creates and launches quite decent main types of weapons, although they are still very raw. Commanders who distinguished themselves in combat conditions are appointed to high command positions. The defense industry of the country goes to martial law.

In 1941, events in Europe also developed rapidly. Germany invades Greece and Yugoslavia. At this time, Russia was conducting a partial and covert mobilization, as a result of which nearly 800 thousand reservists were drafted into the army. In the second half of May, a strategic regrouping of the Red Army began - over 40 divisions moved or prepared to move to the western borders of the country, new divisions and brigades quickly formed. Stalin’s diplomatic efforts were not in vain. In the spring of 1941, a non-aggression pact was concluded with Japan, and the likelihood of war in the Far East declined sharply. Finally, in the last days before the war, many divisions made hidden marches to the border, the headquarters of the border districts moved to front-line command posts, in many divisions in Tanks loaded ammunition and fuel, and aviation preparing for dispersal at field airfields. It seemed that everything was right in the country before the war. Then what is the reason for the heavy defeats of the Red Army at the beginning of the war, and who is to blame?

The answer is unequivocal. The military leadership of the Red Army is to blame for it. It made many difficult-to-explain decisions before the war. That's about these solutions, large and not very, and will be discussed. No wonder they say that the devil is in the details and that the main thing can be determined from these details. Including determine the causes of the defeat of the Red Army at the beginning of the war. Below is a list of only some, large and small, but completely inexplicable actions or omissions of the military leadership of the Red Army before the war. So, let's begin.

Misunderstandings with tanks

In the Belarusian Special Military District, the 6 th mechanized corps was the main attack force. It consisted of over 1000 tanks, including 114 heavy tanks KV-1 and 238 medium tanks T-34. The corps was stationed in the Belostok ridge, that is, in the border bag. According to the terrain conditions, heavy 50-ton tanks KV and 28-ton T-34, due to their mass, could hardly attack anywhere. Unless to the northeast, and that at engineering preparation on a number of small small rivers. Why was the strike force of the Red Army deployed in a border bag, surrounded by swamps and rivers? As a result, the 6 th mechanized corps was actually shot by enemy aircraft and artillery in a few days. A lot of incomprehensible was in the dislocation of other parts of the district. So, there were almost no military units near the bridges across the Neman, that is, in 20 km from the border. Naturally, the bridges were captured on the first day of the war. By the way, it’s not the commanders of the military districts that are to blame for the choice of locations for military units, as is often the case here. The deployment of any part of the claimed General Headquarters of the Red Army and the Commissar of Defense.

It is interesting to look at the tank composition of some divisions stationed, for example, in the Kiev Special Military District. The 10 Tank Division included the following tanks: 63 tank KV, 38 tanks T-34, 61 tank T-28, 181 tank BT, and 22 tank T-26. The 8 Tank Division had 50 KV tanks, 140 T-34 tanks, 68 T-28 tanks, 31 BT tanks and 36 T-26 tanks. In the 43 Tank Division - 5 KV tanks, 2 T-34 tanks and X-NUMX T-230 tanks. In the 26 Tank Division - 4 tank KV-31 (with 2-mm cannon, weight tank 152 tons), 55 light tank T-383 and one tanketka T-26. And this is without taking into account the various modifications of the T-37 and BT tanks.

To which bridge and how many kilometers can heavy and light tanks pass? And how can this divisional tank kaleidoscope be maintained at all? Can anyone understand the logic of military leaders when bundling tank divisions? At the same time, crew training was mainly conducted in combat units, and not in training centers. It is no secret that at the beginning of the war, due to the difficulties with the maintenance of completely different types of tanks and the unpreparedness of crews, armored vehicles were lost in the divisions much more than from enemy fire. By the way, even the cases of refueling of tank diesel engines with gasoline were not very rare. It is completely obvious that before the war tanks were delivered to the troops in an absolutely chaotic and completely illogical manner. And an indirect confirmation of this fact is that already on the third day of the war, government decree No. 1749-756 was issued, which established the order for sending tanks and armored vehicles to the front only as part of "formed, manned and collectively mouths".

One more thing. In the Red Army in the summer of 1940, 20 tank divisions were formed. And 40 tank units 20 motorized divisions began to form in the spring of the year 1941. I wonder where the military leaders were going to get tanks and other equipment to actually simultaneously form the 60 new tank and motorized divisions? Only tanks needed to release at least 10 thousand units. Naturally, the equipment and combat capability of a large number of divisions created in 1941 was, to put it mildly, extremely low. Moreover, many new divisions were formed at the expense of a sharp weakening of the relatively efficient tank divisions created earlier.

AVIATION TRADE AND SHORTAGE OF AIRCRAFT

For a variety of reasons, the numerous Red Army tank forces were unable at the initial stage of the war to give a fitting rebuff to the enemy. 1940 Photo of the Year

An interesting situation occurred before the war and in aviation. This is what General Sandalov, Chief of Staff of the 4 Army, writes in his memoirs about a trip to military units of the 21 district in June 1941 of the year. He reports that the air regiment in Pruzhany received two new MiG fighters two days ago, and the rest of the fighters in the regiment are old, that 20 June unloaded the dismantled Yak-20 fighters from the echelon 1 and that the first two Il-2 received in the assault regiment. Each piece arrived and disassembled in the troops and other types of aircraft. Interestingly, did the specialists in engines, mechanics or electrics of these new airplanes come with two MiGs or two Elahs? Or were the military technicians so qualified that they could properly prepare the aircraft of a new design for a combat flight, and did the pilots fly confidently at once? It is also interesting, were there pilots who had already flown MiGs or Ilahs in the border regiments? Judging by the memoirs of Pokryshkin, there were almost no such pilots. It seemed that problems with the development of new aircraft should not be. They prepared a squadron in the training regiment for flights on new aircraft, and she departed to the combat unit with her technicians, means of support, etc. But the command of the Red Army Air Force, obviously, had its own very original method of training the flight personnel.

On the same trip, that is, 21 June 1941, General Sandalov learned from the commander of the air defense district, Colonel Belov, that all his anti-aircraft units were under fire in Minsk and cover neither the army headquarters, nor the mechanized corps headquarters, nor Aircraft on the ground there is nothing. Note that in the last days before the war, in the border districts, including in the Western District, a number of divisions were advanced by night marches towards the border, in secrecy, the headquarters of the border districts urgently moved to front field command posts, loaded ammunition and fuel into tanks. And at the same time, all the anti-aircraft units of the Western District are on firing somewhere near Minsk.

We go further. Before the war, in the divisions of the Red Army, there should be an anti-aircraft division consisting of eight anti-aircraft guns of caliber 37 mm and four anti-aircraft guns of caliber 76 mm. And even such units with a small number of guns were by no means in all divisions. In fact, the divisions did not have air defense weapons. As a result, the Red Army, first of all its tank and motorized divisions, suffered huge losses from air strikes, especially from Yu-87 dive bombers. But large-caliber anti-aircraft guns DShK, by the way, very effective in the fight against Yu-87, were created in the 1938 year, adopted by the 1939 year and launched in the 1940 year ... in small-scale production. Before 22 June 1941, they were released about 2 thousand. In addition, these machine guns were not in those parts where they should be in the first place, that is, in tank and motorized divisions. By the way, the Germans considered the DShK machine guns to be a very valuable trophy and adopted it.

Record non-stop flights of Stalin falcons to the Far East and America, of course, raised the prestige of the country. But the long-range, high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft in our country have not been created until the end of the war. By the way, German high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft, even in the summer of 1943, flew with impunity over Moscow.

Another example.

At the beginning of the 1937, after testing the prototypes, it became clear that it was urgent to put an 76-mm cannon on the BT tanks, and on the base of the T-26 tank it was convenient to produce self-propelled artillery units. At the same time, the driving characteristics of the tanks almost did not deteriorate. And in the same year, these machines launched ... in a single production. Before the war, they released all 30 self-propelled guns based on T-26 and 130 BT-7 tanks, that is, with an 76-mm cannon. As a result, about 15 thousand BT and T-26 tanks with 45-mm guns and anti-bullet armor in combat were ineffective against the German medium tanks T-3 and T-4, and are also defenseless even from the fire of light 37-mm field guns. Not so many chances for BT and T-26 in battle and against light tanks 38 (t) and T-2, which had thicker frontal armor.

Large forces and funds were spent in the Soviet Union on the creation and serial production of multi-turbo tanks T-35 and T-28. They were released even in 1940 year, in total more than 600 pieces. Although the question of effectiveness in the battle of such mastodons was clearly resolved at the end of the First World War.

Another interesting fact is that, as you know, anti-tank guns were created in the First World War and then proved themselves well. In our country, such guns were developed three years before the outbreak of the war, but they were launched into mass production only after the war began.

The problem was in part of the weapons of the Red Army small arms. By the beginning of the war the main small arms were the Mosin rifle and the Maxim machine gun. But after all, these types of weapons were created 50 years ago and became obsolete even in the First World War. Since the end of the 20s, various new types of small arms have been chaotically developed and released in small batches in the country, but before the war the Red Army had almost no new weapons. Naturally, urgently launched into mass production machines, light machine guns, etc. had a number of serious flaws. And the military leadership of the country, which even in such a very simple matter could not decide in time, is to blame for the situation.

DOWNLOAD END OF LINKOROMANIA

In the middle of the 30-s, Soviet leaders decided to create a powerful fleet. From October 1935 to January 1941, 13 cruisers were under construction right away. Construction proceeded very slowly, and by the beginning of the war only four cruisers were built. Two more cruisers at the end of the war were completed in the Far East. Despite the obvious unpreparedness of the shipbuilding industry to build even cruisers, at the end of the 30-s, the Soviet Union decided to build more powerful ships. Four battleships and two heavy cruisers were laid at once. At the same time, for the entire Soviet time in the country at the time of the laying out of the battleships, only one light cruiser, the Kirov, was built, and even that was built according to Italian documentation.

But what should we build a battleship! At the end of the 30s, thousands of specialists worked on a heavy, and not really necessary for the country program for the construction of cruisers, as well as on a completely unnecessary program for the construction of battleships. By the beginning of the war, tens of thousands of tons of armored steel had gone only to fragments of cruiser and battleship corps. Huge funds and efforts of thousands of specialists were spent on the creation of main caliber guns, powerful power plants, various tests, etc. And the problems in the army and on navy at that time without battleships and cruisers was enough. It is possible that the construction of a powerful fleet is Stalin's whim. But the leadership of the Navy, it seems, also dreamed of cranes, that is, of battleships.

And here are two more interesting facts that happened in the first half of October, 1941, which are mentioned by General Lelushenko in his book “Moscow – Stalingrad – Berlin – Prague”. He writes that in the motorcycle regiment, standing in the city of Noginsk, there was one tank T-34. There were no tanks in any motorcycle regiment of the Red Army. Not supposed to have such regiments of tanks in the state. And in this regiment was a tank T-34. I wonder how he got there? Also, General Lelushenko reports in his memoirs that, on his initiative, in early October 1941 of the year at the Mozhaysky range, his assistants found 16 T-28 tanks, i.e. tanks with an 76-mm gun, but without engines. Lelyushenko obviously went to this range more than once and knew about the state of affairs there. Interestingly, how many non-powered tanks were at that time at different ranges of the Red Army?

With the role of cavalry, all the leading European countries were already determined in the middle of the First World War. After that war, cavalry in the European armies was virtually gone. In the fall of 1939, the war in Poland again clearly confirmed the conclusions of the First World War. And what did our military leaders have been waiting for for almost two years? True, several cavalry divisions were disbanded, and several more were reformed, or rather, renamed ... mountain cavalry! Still, at the beginning of the war in the Red Army there were at least seven cavalry divisions in the border districts alone.

However, there were problems with another kind of troops. Thus, in the Red Army in the prewar year, they managed to form five airborne corps and a number of separate airborne units. That is all in all the Airborne Forces had over 60 battalions. And the entire military transport aviation of the country in 1941 could lift two battalions in one flight at best. As a result, at the beginning of the war, most of the landing corps of the Red Army fought as light rifle units, that is, virtually without artillery, mortars, etc. Upstairs, it was obviously decided that heavy weapons are not necessary for brave soldiers.

LESSON OF MILITARY GEOGRAPHY

The right bank of the Western Dvina River, as is known, was a serious and well-prepared defensive line in the First World War. There were even rokadnye railways and highways. It is obvious that at the main bridges across this river the Red Army was obliged to place at least a few units to cover them. But by 22 June 1941, on the banks of the Western Dvina, many bridges had virtually no military units. Upstairs probably believed that the Red Army would have time to cover the bridges. Miscalculated. Bridges across the Western Dvina at Jekabpils and Dvinsk (Daugavpils), the German troops took the run. But in the Baltic Military District on the eve of the war there were 26 divisions.

In the Kiev Military District, the direction from the border protrusion in the Ustyluh-Sokal area, that is, the shortest direction to Kiev, was covered by relatively weak forces of the Red Army. It is not surprising that the Germans here struck the main blow, tearing the front into two parts. I wonder where the Red Army expected the brunt of the Germans? Through the Carpathians or through the marshes of the Pripyat River?

The list of unexplained actions or omissions of the high command of the Red Army in the development and production of weapons, in the staffing of divisions with personnel and equipment, in the placement of units in border districts, etc. You can, of course, continue. And immediately recall the law on the transition of quantity into quality, the phrase "obvious - incredible", etc. Of course, there were quite a few miscalculations in the German army before the war. But inexplicable actions or omissions in military construction are hard to find.

When considering the failures of the Red Army in the initial period of the war, attention is often drawn primarily to the mistakes of Stalin. Of course, Stalin had both operational, and military-industrial, and other mistakes. There were monstrous repression. Serious miscalculations were also made by the leaders and designers of the country's defense industry. And in the initial period of the war, the leadership of the Red Army also made many operational mistakes, including difficult to explain. But, nevertheless, in the defeats of the Red Army in the initial period of the war with Germany, the guilty party was above all the top military leadership of the country, which, even before the start of the war, was distinguished by its "inexplicable actions or inactions." Stalin, who in the prewar period did not actually control the activities of senior military leaders on purely military issues, was also to blame.

There is, if I am not mistaken, an ancient Roman proverb, the meaning of which lies in the fact that, starting a war, you need not only to succeed in it, but it is important that the enemy do foolish things. Yes, the German army in the summer of 1941, was very strong. But the leadership of the Red Army also “distinguished”. The Minister of Defense, the Chief of the General Staff, the commanders of the districts and other responsible military ranks are obliged to form, deploy, train and arm the army in accordance with common sense, and not according to their own departmental concepts. Unfortunately, the leadership of the Red Army succeeded more in its inexplicable actions or inactions before the war. In any case, do not make the military leadership a multitude of inexplicable prewar mistakes, the Red Army, perhaps, could have stopped the enemy on the Western Dvina-Dnieper line by the winter of 1941.

And further. In the military department of our country and before the war with Germany, inexplicable actions or inactions were committed. And there were a lot of them. Such examples can be found in stories Crimean War, and in the history of the Russian-Japanese War, and in the history of the First World War. But even now the times have not changed much. More recently, a few years ago, we witnessed further unexplained actions or omissions in the Russian army and the subsequent emergency removal of the country's defense minister. The question now is how long the army will be built in the right direction.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Andrey Yuryevich 18 October 2015 06: 21 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    mmmda ... Author Igor Perov, just a design engineer, but undertook to judge the military policy of the USSR, and it was extremely derogatory. Everything is wrong, everything is bad, mediocrity, traitors ... and the ships are not the same, and there are a lot of tanks and everything is wrong ... I would rather be engaged in my own business-design, but would not go into analytics. Not yours ...
    1. mark1 18 October 2015 06: 49 New
      • 23
      • 0
      +23
      The author is confused in something, but on the whole the train of thought is correct and historical parallels are very appropriate.
      1. Vladimir.z. 18 October 2015 09: 21 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Quote: mark1
        The author is confused in something, but on the whole the train of thought is correct and historical parallels are very appropriate.


        Now everyone here is smart, but how would he behave at that time ...
        1. mark1 18 October 2015 11: 35 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Vladimir.z.

          Now everyone here is smart, but how would he behave at that time.

          I want to believe that with grenades on the tanks. And how would you behave?
          1. captain 18 October 2015 14: 08 New
            • 19
            • 0
            +19
            You can agree with the author, you can not, but the man expressed his opinion. He is outraged by the operational construction of our troops in the Western theater. And before the war, in January 1941, Zhukov was our chief of general staff (he hosted the Victory Parade), before him the future marshal Meretskov led. Zhukov could not determine the direction of the main blow of the Germans. Judging by the operational formation of the troops, we were not at all prepared to defend ourselves. Who studied at the academy Frunze remembers Triandafilov and his theory of deep operation. We were not preparing to defend ourselves, so our mechanized corps were, in the opinion of the author, in "uncomfortable places." We were preparing to attack and smash the enemy on its territory. Therefore, airfields were near the border, and for example in the Bialystok ledge concentrated a large number of troops that were surrounded. We did not draw a conclusion from the German offensive operations in Europe, after which the Germans reduced the number of tanks in their tank divisions and increased the number of motorized infantry. Our tank divisions were very bulky and poorly controlled, I'm not talking about Mech corps (during the Second World War, 1031tank even tank armies didn’t have us) Many mistakes and shortcomings can be enumerated, and the author voiced a number of them. It’s bad that our historians and politicians are afraid to write the truth, and people say that they won with human blood. It’s bad that our bosses don’t draw conclusions and repeat these mistakes in every war. In order not to be unfounded I recall the events in Afghanistan; We fought in the mountains, but we did not have real mountain infantry. I myself was the commander of the 3 mountain SME in the 177 SME 108 MSD. Everyone in the mountains was carrying on themselves, the difference in armament and equipment between the regular and mountain battalion was that we had the AKS in service and the anti-tank platoon had a flamethrower compartment. Spirits in the Pandscher DShK and mortars were transported on mullahs, and we were on our soldiers. And during the war years, the Red Army included the GDS divisions and mountain-pack units. When I, at one of the briefings before Panscher, asked a question about the creation of mountain pack units in mountain battalions, Colonel General Meremskaya laughed me. He was the deputy commander of the Ground Forces. Then there was Chechnya, and only after Chechnya they began to talk about the war in the mountains. And how many people have put in all this time, no one will remember or answer for it. The most surprising thing is that the mountain units are formed in the modern army, he insisted Putin personally, a man very far from the army. By the way, regarding the author’s remarks about the airborne forces before the war, he says that they could parachute only two battalions at a time. No wonder we have now 4 airborne forces and 4 airborne infantry battalions, but we parachute them can't even one division Yu. Our army does not like people with their own opinions, and if it is different from the opinion of the boss, then woe to this person.
            1. corn 18 October 2015 14: 40 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: captain
              Our army does not like people with their own opinions, and if it is different from the opinion of the boss, then woe to this person.

              Is it only in the army? Is it only with us? Ignorance is always aggressive and inclined to pack. And it’s very difficult to go against a collective or crowd (who likes which word more). And it’s easy enough to call democracy - shit democracy, there will be no significant consequences. Try to call a tyrant a tyrant.
              1. 16112014nk 18 October 2015 15: 03 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Well, a jester can call. And more than once!
            2. Uncle 18 October 2015 14: 41 New
              • -1
              • 0
              -1
              Quote: captain
              we weren’t getting ready to defend ourselves
              This is understandable, but why did they start to oversleep the beginning of the war? Frankly, I believe that command at all levels was completely devoid of the ability to think and make decisions. The general state of fear deprived people of a critical assessment of the situation, just to make mistakes ...
            3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 October 2015 18: 07 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: captain
              Who studied at the Frunze Academy remembers Triandafilov and his theory of deep operation

              I did not study at the Frunze Academy, but I read Triandafillov. There is no theory of deep operation in his writings. The organizational structure of the tank forces according to Triandafillov is the most primitive possible (the actions of separate, purely tank formations without infantry and artillery)
              Quote: captain
              We did not conclude from German offensive operations in Europe, after which the Germans reduced the number of tanks in their tank divisions and increased the number of motorized infantry.

              We just knew nothing about all this. According to our intelligence, Germany in the years 1940-1941 could throw 10-12 thousand tanks or even more into the USSR.
              Yours faithfully,
              hi
              1. ASK505 19 October 2015 11: 26 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                According to our intelligence, Germany in the years 1940-1941 could throw 10-12 thousand tanks or even more into the USSR.


                It is no coincidence that Stalin did not believe such scouts worthless. According to the data cited by B. Muller-Gillebrand in his book “The German Army. 1933-1945. " Germany began the war against the Soviet Union, with 3582 tanks and assault guns on the Eastern Front. Of these, about 180 T-I, 746 T-II, 772 Pz-38 (t), 965
                T-III, 439 T-IV, 230 commander and about 250 assault guns. (Together with the allies, the tank fleet totaled 3712 units).

                R
            4. Mikado 19 October 2015 14: 02 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              We also did not prepare to advance, otherwise the buildings would be brought together with a clear mission. The group at the time of the German attack was neither defensive nor offensive. The blow was inflicted on a peacetime army.
              I did not like the statement about small arms that we were all armed with outdated rifles and machine guns. For some reason, the author forgets about hundreds of thousands of self-loading rifles SVT and automatic ABC (if you take the story, during the war only 2 armies were armed with large numbers of self-loading rifles - the USSR at the beginning of the war, and the United States). Yes, the weapon was more difficult to operate than the three-ruler. And the author also forgets that the main weapon of the Wehrmacht infantryman throughout the war was a rifle, or rather, a Mauser carbine.
              The article is a minus.
              1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 14: 07 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Almost all of these SVT with cartridges for them were captured by the Germans in border warehouses, and then they fought against us ...
                1. Mikado 19 October 2015 15: 01 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  In warehouses - not in warehouses, this is a rhetorical question ... But the Germans were struck by the abundance of self-loading in the Red Army (they could not create their own decent self-loading rifle), they put the captured rifles into their armament, and assigned their index (like PPSh). The Germans were generally distinguished by the fact that they put into service everything that goes and shoots, modernized something, for some successful captured weapons, even ammunition was fired.
                  As an example, sorry for the verbosity, there is a wonderful old film "Lark". The German guns tested in the storyline are 7,5 cm PaK 97/38, a 75 mm French gun rearranged on the carriage of a 50 mm German anti-tank gun. And only these guns were thousands.
                  1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 15: 20 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    not rhetorical at all, whoever stored them there for them ...
                    1. Mikado 19 October 2015 17: 24 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Well, someone and part of the troops brought to the training grounds. Someone and airplanes heaped together.
                      I am not a supporter of conspiracy theory. The Americans at Pearl Harbor did exactly the same thing, sleepy soldiers locked in munitions, even supplied electricity to ships from the shore. A blow to an unprepared army. And the one who seizes the initiative reaps the trophies.
                      Was the Red Army ready to attack Hitler at 41? All supporters of this theory let them think only about vehicles. I’m not saying that even in the states the mechanized corps of the Red Army were not balanced in terms of the ratio people-tanks-other military equipment-cars-radio stations (such a bulk could hardly have been supplied with the required number of trucks, mainly “one and a half”), but this the number of cars was not. They only had to get mobilization from the national economy in case of war. IMHO, all the successful operations of the Red Army began in 1943, including due to the fact that the necessary amount of transport was accumulated. And his own, and Lend-Lease.
                      1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 21: 10 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        So - a participant ...

                        The American elite had to bring the people into the war. Not one of their aircraft carriers was in the bay.

                        No, it wasn’t. She was unable to mobilize before the enemy, as in the WWII.
                        In addition, the USSR would immediately receive a war with Japan in the Far East (Anti-Comintern Pact Rome-Berlin-Tokyo).

                        They began in 1943 because they made enough aircraft to gain air supremacy, which was achieved in the air battle over the Kuban.
                        And the Allied aviation did not participate in it at all, and LL aircraft in the Soviet Air Force were 9%.
                      2. Mikado 19 October 2015 22: 45 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Before the WWII, the army was not subject to such large-scale reforms as the Red Army since 1940.
                        Conclusions for the reform were made following the results of the Finnish war, after a large-scale meeting with the present Stalin. The conclusions were about the training of troops, about their supply, tactics. The conclusions were fundamentally correct.
                        Marshal Tymoshenko was appointed People’s Commissar of Defense, who showed himself in preparing the troops for the breakthrough of the Mannerheim Line (including building models of fortifications and chasing every battalion on them).

                        The troops received new equipment. But even such wonderful cars for the 41st year, like the KV and T-34, needed well-trained crews and competent service. To do this, brigades of technicians were sent from the factories, but there weren’t enough for all of them, and there were cases, for example, the T-34 engines failed due to refueling with gasoline and not diesel fuel (an example cited by the leading tank historian Svirin. He died this year , blessed memory of him!) The release technique itself after 1940 suffered from childhood diseases. For example, HF in its basic model could not be brought to a reliable state, because it is overloaded.

                        About the American elite ... They needed September 11th as well. But, nevertheless, a blow at Pearl Harbor was dealt to the sleeping fleet and the peacetime army.

                        You're right. It seems that in the 43rd everything came together: the troops and commanders gained the necessary combat experience, the aircraft achieved air superiority, the supply was established, finally, large quantities of equipment were received, there was enough ammunition (an important point - in the offensives of winter-spring 42 the year was clearly not enough, some commanders even removed 120 mm mortars from the front and took them to the rear; there weren’t any), the year itself began with a big victory, which also had great moral significance.

                        The Soviet Union withstood the blow of the BEST and UNBEATABLE at that time army of the world with enormous combat experience, stopped it, despite enormous casualties, and finished it off in its den.
                      3. Scraptor 19 October 2015 23: 42 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        From the Stalin purges, the state of the army improved. It was about that the distance to the west is less and the condition of roads is better, and the population density is greater.

                        Sep 11 on the contrary, not everyone came to the workplace in the morning ... It wouldn’t be asleep would not have had such an effect and it would have been harder to rock the Americans to fight not only for Hawaii 3,5 years (and a couple of the same islands in revenge).

                        All that mattered was that its own aviation appeared in sufficient numbers. Without it, modern warfare is impossible.
                        The victory at the beginning of the year was reached in bad weather, as the Germans counter-attacked in the Ardennes.

                        With heavy losses, and as soon as America did not oppose this, supplying the endless LL to the Reich strategic materials, and without even introducing a formal embargo, although there was a state of war since the end of 1941.
                        "If we see that Germany wins, then we should help Russia, and if Russia will win, we should help Germany, and thus let them kill as much as possible ..."
                        - Harry Truman ("New York Times", 24.06.1941/XNUMX/XNUMX)

                        Senator, head of the federal government's armament research program emergency committee, Freemason, next US President. He also bombed Hiroshima later ...
                        The lair was not quite there, in fact. But it also made sense. At least something that is not for the "puddle". The Japan of which they trolled Russia and the USSR from 1904 to 1941, they also took back on a leash in 1945 quickly, simply occupying it separately.
                      4. derik1970 20 October 2015 11: 23 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        you have an asterisk on uniform but you can’t understand the content of your speech, a set of words ... watch the movie Aloha, the same thing there, the characters are talking and talking, but the meaning of their conversation is unclear ...
      2. ASK505 21 November 2015 14: 52 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: captain
        Our army does not like people with their own opinions, and if it is different from the opinion of the boss, then woe to this person.


        This is not only in the army. This is some kind of hereditary disease in our generals. Stalin, for example, could not defeat this general mafia of nonsense, crooks and careerists. About 100 order-bearing generals sat after the war under investigation until his mysterious death for his "affairs" during the war. But for Nicholas II there was the problem of finding admirals for the war with Japan in 1905. But Chechnya is no exception. Ranks, privileges - yes, but to die in the war - no.
  2. fif21 18 October 2015 20: 29 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Vladimir.z.
    but how would he behave at that time ...
    Here is the key to the answer.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  • vladimirZ 18 October 2015 10: 25 New
    • 14
    • 0
    +14
    Now I’m reading the memoirs of Chief Aviation Marshal Alexander Golovanov, before the war, a civilian, an Aeroflot pilot, a former head of the East Siberian Civil Aviation Administration, before the war, Aeroflot chief pilot.

    Golovanov before the war drew attention to the fact that in the Red Army there was practically no Long-Range Aviation (ADD), the pilots of long-range bomber aviation of the Red Army for the most part did not know how to fly at night, using radio navigation equipment, on instruments used by civilian pilots in Aeroflot.
    I wrote a letter to I.V. Stalin in January 1941. Stalin called Golovonov, a conversation took place, after which Golovanov, a civilian who did not even have a military rank, was offered to create military strategic aviation - ADD, practically from scratch.
    In February 1941, Golovanov was appointed commander of the future 212 long-range bomber regiment, recruited from civilian pilots - the future basis of the Red Army Long-Range Aviation.
    And then from the 212nd regiment, using its personnel, the 1941st long-range aviation division is created in August 81, which, due to the inability of the high command of the Air Force to use long-range aviation, is already transferred to the direct submission of the Supreme High Command Headquarters in December 1941. personally I.V. To Stalin under the name of the 3rd long-range air division of the Supreme High Command.
    And in February 1942, Golovanov was appointed commander of long-range aviation (ADD) of the Supreme High Command Headquarters, a new type of troops in the Red Army, which he creates.
    In February 1941, E.A. Golovanov, who did not have any rank, was immediately assigned the military rank of “lieutenant colonel,” when he was appointed to the post of commander of the regiment he created, and in August 1944, he was Chief Air Marshal, commander of Long-Range Aviation, and later commander of long-range aviation of the USSR.
    After the war, when the need for Golovanov A.E. passed, he is suspended from business, although in 1950 he graduated from the combined arms department of the Academy of the General Staff with a gold medal.
    After the death of Stalin, in 1953, he was sent to the reserve. Since 1958, he worked as deputy chief of the Civil Aviation Research Institute for Flight Service.

    Now ask yourself the question what was the highest military command of the USSR before the war?
    Command, marshals and generals who did not see obvious things consciously or inability to work.

    And 29 mechanized 1000-tank corps created by the Chief of the General Staff Zhukov and the people's commissar of defense Tymoshenko?
    The mechanized corps, for which there were not so many tanks in the state, and those that were created, due to the large number of tanks in them, could not normally move along existing roads due to constantly occurring traffic jams. Corps in which there was no proper number of repair and serviced vehicles, because of which the Red Army in the early days of the war lost all its tank potential.

    In our history, the states have not objectively fully understood the reasons for the poor preparation of the Army for war, the defeats of 1941-42, blamed everything on I.V. Stalin, leaving the specific culprits of the defeat - the generals and marshals, not involved in these crimes, making them "Marshals of Victory." And the fact that these are crimes, military and state, due to which millions of people died, remained even beyond the scope of a simple discussion.
    1. Valentine 18 October 2015 13: 42 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Since 1934, German intelligence has not eaten its bread in vain, introducing its employees into all spheres of industry and the army, including the defense industry. Stalinist repression-countermeasures
      German special services, when "they cut down wood, chips fly." And this "sawing" gave little, in the sense of neutralization
      foreign agents, we were not ready for war in every sense of the word, neither technically nor psychologically,
      although patriotism was enormous, and only thanks to him we survived.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 October 2015 18: 10 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        Quote: Valentine
        Since 1934, German intelligence has not eaten its bread in vain, introducing its employees into all spheres of industry and the army, including the defense industry.

        I don’t know where you got it from. I strongly recommend that you read Tippelskirch, the man most directly involved in reconnaissance before the attack on the USSR.
        In Germany nothing was known about the USSR. The calculation of the strength of the Red Army was done like this - they took the number of tanks, guns, machine guns. divisions of the French army, divided by the size of the French population, multiplied by the population of the USSR.
        1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 00: 36 New
          • -4
          • 0
          -4
          Where did you get that no? And what is your relationship with a German agent tippelskirch?
          In what year were they recruited?
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 19 October 2015 11: 45 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Scraptor
            Where did you get that no?

            Why not? German spies under your bed?
            Quote: Scraptor
            And what is your relationship with a German agent tippelskirch?

            If only they would google who Tippelskirch is. Well, in the order of another educational program - since 1938, Kurt von Tippelskirch served as the head of the intelligence department of the general staff of the ground forces.
            Quote: Scraptor
            In what year were they recruited?

            I’ll tell you everything as a native. Password: "A flock of polar frogs flies to bomb the Kremlin," a secret card at the bottom of the rear right boot, and a submarine is waiting in square 243/15.
            1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 12: 06 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              In your look. Better yourself.

              You won’t send the Russian Buk there?

              Say and subscribe as cute, with your hand ...
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 19 October 2015 13: 44 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                In your look. Better yourself.

                What for? I already know that they are not there laughing
                Quote: Scraptor
                You won’t send the Russian Buk there?

                Where? Under the bed? In the year 1938?
                Quote: Scraptor
                Say and subscribe as cute, with your hand ...

                Subscribe, subscribe laughing
                1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 14: 25 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  And your curator tippelskirch too?

                  In 1937.

                  It will be necessary for him to hit that you also work for the British, and then perhaps even ink will have to not be spent ...
              2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk 19 October 2015 13: 44 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                In your look. Better yourself.

                What for? I already know that they are not there laughing
                Quote: Scraptor
                You won’t send the Russian Buk there?

                Where? Under the bed? In the year 1938?
                Quote: Scraptor
                Say and subscribe as cute, with your hand ...

                Subscribe, subscribe laughing
          2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Uncle 18 October 2015 14: 48 New
      • -4
      • 0
      -4
      Quote: vladimirZ
      leaving the specific culprits of the defeat - the generals and marshals, not involved in these crimes, making them "Marshals of Victory"

      Zhukov’s talent is unconditional, at least against the background of other leaders. It was not for nothing that the IVS transferred him from one section to another, precisely because of staff shortages. And the fate of Leningrad is not known, if not Zhukov. And everyone makes mistakes. In general, as a Christian, I believe that not everything is in human hands, the Lord is creating a lot.
      1. go21zd45few 18 October 2015 17: 05 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Hope for God, but don’t be bad.
  • pazuhinm 18 October 2015 19: 48 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    exceptionally true. And all these minuses are exceptional "blah blah" of our exceptional "marshals." to admit their shortcomings is normal. And to kill everyone with helmets is a favorite action of our star commentators in VO.
  • science fiction writer 18 October 2015 06: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    did not go into analytics. not yours is ...

    I agree, I drove the blizzard on topics where venerable historians did not put all the points over i to the end.
  • Good me 18 October 2015 07: 54 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    Quote: Andrew Y.
    mmmda ... Author Igor Perov, just a design engineer


    Yes, a design engineer writing:
    By the beginning of the war, the main small arms were the Mosin rifle and Maxim's machine gun. But after all, these types of weapons were created 50 years ago and became obsolete back in World War I.


    At the same time, the Mauser 98 rifle (kurtz, shortened), and the Germans, for example, did not consider the Mauser 98 rifle, the 1898 model of the year, to be considered "obsolete" ...

    You can argue a lot about the merits and demerits of a particular type of weapon, but the final point in the debate is only the experience of their use, and how the troops treated them ...

    It is noteworthy, but to this day, Mosinka is kept in warehouses, "just in case" ...
    And many snipers who have tested this rifle in practice, still prefer its SVD, precisely for its accuracy characteristics and incredible reliability and survivability.

    Here, the "junk", in a new "frame", but unfortunately not ours, but the American firm Archangel Manufacturing.















    1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 08: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Good I
      Here, the "junk", in a new "frame", but unfortunately not ours, but the American firm Archangel Manufacturing.

      Yes, come on, it doesn’t mean anything. But the National Guard is not arming her) This company is engaged in modding weapons, which is quite ordinary for America. They tune and Mosberg, and the Mauser car98, and AK, and M16, and SKS, and remington. Bring arisaku - tune her too. This is interesting to gun fans and has nothing to do with the eternal cry "at the beginning of the war came with a Mosin rifle and a Maxim machine gun - here we are losers!" does not have.
      1. Good me 18 October 2015 09: 22 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Quote: Das Boot
        Yes, come on, it doesn’t mean anything. But the National Guard is not arming her) This company is engaged in modding weapons, which is quite ordinary for America. They tune and Mosberg, and the Mauser car98, and AK, and M16, and SKS, and remington. Bring arisaku - tune her too. This is interesting to gun fans and has nothing to do with the eternal cry "at the beginning of the war came with a Mosin rifle and a Maxim machine gun - here we are losers!" does not have.


        I have you CUTTED, you are CUT TO me ...

        The thing is that even now, ballistic and other characteristics of rarity are quite consistent with modern requirements.

        And the author writes about the "mosin", that they say it is outdated already in the WWI ...
        1. Awaz 18 October 2015 11: 08 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          you need to understand that by that time the tactics and conditions of the battle have changed. Mosinka, it still might not work badly in conditions of defensive battles at long distances, but in close combat it was already inferior to the automatic pistols that the Germans successfully used, not allowing the Red Army soldiers to conduct effective retaliatory fire. Not without reason, in the end, the Red Army also switched to automatic weapons.
        2. Das Boot 18 October 2015 11: 50 New
          • -1
          • 0
          -1
          Quote: Good I
          The thing is that even now, ballistic and other characteristics of rarity are quite consistent with modern requirements.

          for members of shooting clubs traveling weekend to the shooting range? Well yes, why not.
          1. Good me 18 October 2015 12: 18 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Das Boot
            for members of shooting clubs traveling weekend to the shooting range? Well yes, why not.


            You are dense ... To indecent disgrace.

            Come on, enlighten:
            In tests of the modern “three-ruler” at a distance of 100, m bullets fell into a circle with a diameter of 3,5 cm. But with a modern sniper rifle Dragunov, this circle ideally is 8 cm, really much more! An acceptable aiming range of 1300 m, almost a third higher than that of the army SVD! The reliability of the rifle in combat conditions was not in doubt; it was tested by two world wars. In 2000, the OC-48 sniper rifle was put into production. The OC-48 rifle is made by remaking a sniper version of the Mosin rifle. These rifles were selected after shooting from the mass of "ordinary" by accuracy.

            Posted by: Mikhail Gruzdev
            Source: http://shkolazhizni.ru/archive/0/n-50674/
            © Shkolazhizni.ru
            1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 13: 37 New
              • -5
              • 0
              -5
              Quote: Good I
              Come on, enlighten:

              So what? I think there is a lot of junk on preservation and warehouses that is waiting for its enthusiasts to remake. Anyway, the argument is about anything - it all depends on the shooter's personal preferences. About OTs - it's just marketing. Canned food with good liquidity gained a second life. Why not? Specialists are rather skeptical of OTs-48K. It’s one thing to hang the trunks of the 37-38th year with new stocks and send them to hunting stores, and the production of a full cycle for the Ministry of Internal Affairs is another thing. So my phrase
              Quote: Das Boot
              for members of shooting clubs traveling weekend to the shooting range? Well yes, why not.
              applies to OC.
        3. Uncle 18 October 2015 14: 54 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Good I
          ballistic and other characteristics of a rarity, completely correspond to modern requirements

          Dear, what are the "other characteristics"? WWII is the era of automatic weapons. So you can consider the dagger as a modern weapon, it works the same way as 2 thousand years ago.
          1. Good me 18 October 2015 15: 23 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Uncle
            Dear, what are the "other characteristics"


            Reliability and ease of maintenance and development of drugs, for example ...
        4. Scraptor 18 October 2015 16: 21 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          her fuse was very uncomfortable

          strained more:
          ... and aviation was preparing for dispersal at field airfields. It seemed that everything was done right in the country before the war.

          aviation was dispersed at field airfields.
          someone ordered her to fly back two days before the Germans attack. zeitkas were removed from airfields for training exercises at the training grounds, weapons were removed from the aircraft for testing from some even engines ...
          1. 23 region 18 October 2015 23: 38 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Scraptor
            someone ordered her to fly back two days before the Germans attack. zeitkas were removed from airfields for training exercises at the training grounds, weapons were removed from the aircraft for testing from some even engines ...

            It was so. My grandmother told me. She lived near Minsk before the war, next to the airfield. All residents and military were waiting for the war.
            And when the aircraft were dismantled, they all cursed and were indignant, but there was an order. Such a time. For failure to put to the wall.
            By the way, l / s were released on leave, but almost all remained in a position - they waited for it to start.
            My grandmother worked in an orphanage, everything was assembled for them, and with the first bombing they set off east. True, almost all the time on foot, with a bunch of kids. Got it.
            1. Scraptor 18 October 2015 23: 50 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              And shot, and planted. Only now it is still unknown which of the headquarters on the advanced airfields handed it out orally ... and they’ll probably try to make fun of you here (under one of such articles in August this year it already happened, but didn’t look further).
      2. bairat 18 October 2015 09: 34 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        If the author believes that the 50-year-old Mosin rifle was inappropriate on the sidelines of the WWII, then what about our current weapons? Kalashnikov has long stepped over this anniversary. Tu95, t72 are also rooted far back in the last century. Compare this with the scale of pre-war modernization: tanks, planes, cannons, personal weapons - basically everything was no older than 10 years old, and in most cases it exceeded foreign analogues. Another thing is that they did not have time to master combat use.
        1. Good me 18 October 2015 09: 53 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: bairat
          Another thing is that they did not have time to master combat use.

          yes yes yes

          I agree three times. And I will add that the rearmament program, akin to the one that was conceived and is being implemented NOW, was not allowed to finish us. "Shot on takeoff" ...

          I would like to believe that the nuclear triad, and “something else” as a deterrence factor, will give us the opportunity to “redraw” the army in all respects.
          1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 11: 33 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Good I
            rearmament program ... we were not allowed to finish. "Shot on takeoff" ...

            nonsense. On what "take-off" something? Mantra number 2 after "treacherously and suddenly." The Red Army had enough arsenal to stop the Wehrmacht, which, incidentally, also did not turn out to be called "re-armed". Our tank tactics before WWII trampled on the level of the doctrines of Ernst Volkhheim of the 20s (Guderian as a theorist then looked rather pale against his background), and already in the 37th Fast Heinz voiced the doctrine of tank wedges. Why not study? The work on anti-tank defense among the Germans was also very significant. We had to learn from an eventual adversary. AND
            Quote: Good I
            "Shot on takeoff"
            - It’s quite a universal excuse for any period of our history.
            1. alekc75 19 October 2015 08: 37 New
              • -1
              • 0
              -1
              not enough time for rearmament
      3. avt
        avt 18 October 2015 13: 17 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        Quote: Das Boot
        Yes, come on, it does not mean anything.

        We’ll give up, we’ll certainly give up. But only when you tell Az to the sinner than the rank and file infantryman of the Wehrmacht was massively armed. Anecdotes about the fact that the Germans are all with machine guns, and we don’t have to offer three-rulers. Well, even if you add some two countries in the World before the Second World War, self-loading rifles were massively armed, which the engineer didn’t use knows if a feverish nonsense writes about rifles and machine guns, you might want to find out about ,, machine-gun drama "and why you had to put Maxim back in the series, and the three-line too.
        1. Good me 18 October 2015 13: 22 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: avt
          Jokes about the fact that, the Germans are all with machine guns, and we with the three-line "do not offer.

          You're right. The myth of the general “automation” of the Wehrmacht is debunked, as well as the “three-line for five” ...
        2. Das Boot 18 October 2015 13: 44 New
          • -2
          • 0
          -2
          Quote: avt
          We’ll give up, we’ll certainly give up. But only when you tell Az to the sinner than the rank and file infantryman of the Wehrmacht was massively armed

          Dear, my remark was related to the American tuning of the Mosin-Nagan. Why did you drag the Wehrmacht?
          Quote: avt
          Jokes about the fact that the Germans are all with machine guns, and we with a three-line "do not offer

          I think there is no shkolota gathered here, do not distort. Although, in this thread I met a comment-complaint that, supposedly, "instead of the general armament of the PPSh infantry ..." Well, these are the costs, again, of passion for heroic cinema. And, here, I found:
          Quote: faridg7
          Private Vasya Pupkin, and instead of PPSh, they stuck a mosin in his hands with the words a fool bullet, a bayonet
          1. avt
            avt 18 October 2015 14: 48 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Das Boot
            Dear, my remark was related to the American tuning of the Mosin-Nagan.

            Well, it’s possible and specifically about this modernization. What is wrong with her? Not - I didn’t hold this particular specimen in my hands, but it’s no worse than the options that Tulaks make of it, including bullpup. Convenient in contrast to the standard aglitskgo, a box with a pistol grip and an adjustable butt, a magazine from the SVD, a fuse, again, and no need to come off, well, but the barrel is simply high-quality, especially in a sniper version, which was something specific users said after real battles. The only thing I don’t know is does plastic -50 hold? If yes, then it's gorgeous. Well, and that comment is where laughing
            Quote: faridg7
            the author is right about outdated designs for that period. ballistic requirements are not all that needs to be attached to infantry small arms.
            What can I say? Only if you ask its author.
            fool The author of the article, however, like you are in the know
            Quote: avt
            which two countries in the world before the Second World War massively used self-loading rifles

            Quote: faridg7
            , this is done by private Vasya Pupkin, and instead of PPSh they put a mosin in his hands with the words a fool bullet, a bayonet - well done

            Yeah, but on the other hand, Hans Schmulke got an old Mauser and a wish - do you want an automatic machine gun? Take it from Vasya Pupkin. wassat laughing
    2. faridg7 18 October 2015 11: 57 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Yes, at least modernize with the mosin, and it will not be possible to create the necessary density of fire in defense, and even more so in the offensive, with its help, therefore, the author is right about the outdated samples for that period. ballistic requirements are not all that needs to be attached to infantry small arms. Yes, accurate and long-range weapons are necessary to equip snipers, but not a sniper defends and even less an offensive (he only provides support, albeit not unimportant), this is done by private Vasya Pupkin, and instead of PPSh they put a ruler with the words bullet in his hands fool, bayonet - well done
    3. Mikhail3 18 October 2015 12: 22 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Good I
      And many snipers who have tested this rifle in practice, still prefer its SVD, precisely for its accuracy characteristics and incredible reliability and survivability.

      It's funny that you yourself answered. Yes, a good battlefield sniper. And a rather inferior rifle for mass weapons in the conditions of the Great Patriotic War. Long, heavy ... well, etc.
      On this topic. If you look at the issues raised by the author, not from the point of view of preparation for war, but from the point of view of report and career growth, everything immediately becomes much clearer. As many tanks as possible! More! For reporting on the steady growth of the tank "livestock" you can always fool promotion, increase, and even a medal. Which tanks? Who cares? Stalin doesn’t read all the reports, and so they sit on top of them ... hot about beautiful reports.
      And the "worthless mouse fuss" report looks completely different. There are all kinds of despicable rembats, tractors, vehicles, supplies. Who will award a medal for the painstaking work on agreeing marching speeds? Yes, no one will allow this coordination to be dealt with! Because the report is peppy about this subject incomprehensible to the top leadership. The elders simply do not understand the terms, they did not study for that.
      The attitude to “all kinds of” mechanics, engineers, and technicians amusingly glances out from the mass of the materials of the time. Understanding that you injured an engineer at a tank repair plant had an impact on the situation at the front equal to the destruction of at least a tank regiment, this understanding did not even come close to the army leadership. Not to mention planning some operations or bringing information to subordinates.
      Here Putin is an officer, albeit a scout. And Shoigu is a specialist in rescue operations, that is, first of all, as an organization of logistics schemes from scratch. And we look at the difference in the organization of the outbreak of hostilities. For example, the Finnish War and the Syrian operation. Impressive, isn't it?
  • avt
    avt 18 October 2015 10: 33 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: Andrew Y.
    . Author Igor Perov, just a design engineer,

    Yah!?? Really chtol? Where does infa come from? I would never have guessed after reading this
    At the beginning of 1937, after testing the prototypes, it became clear that it was urgent to put a 76-mm cannon on BT tanks, and on the basis of the T-26 tank it was convenient to produce self-propelled artillery installations. At the same time, the driving performance of the tanks almost did not deteriorate.
    Rather, a talker is a talker who believes that he has already been born with knowledge of everything and everyone. Where can I see real documents on the same tanks, or read collections of extracts from those who read the documents.
    Quote: Andrew Y.
    I would do better with my business-design,

    And what does that design?
    Quote: mark1
    on the whole, the train of thought is true and historical parallels are very appropriate.

    And what is actually true? In the fact that the author, knowing the result, adjusts the solution to the answer and shakes generously with shit? Well, even in this it is not original, it just gives a brief squeeze from Bushkov’s two-volume book about Stalin. And even with an aplomb of an intellectual - a carrier beyond which he knows one thing, well, genius, he teaches Putin’s campaign wassat
    And further. In the military department of our country, before the war with Germany, unexplained acts or omissions took place. And there were a lot of them. Such examples can be found in the history of the Crimean War, and in the history of the Russo-Japanese War, and in the history of the First Pestilence. But even now, times have not changed much. More recently, a few years ago, we witnessed yet another inexplicable action or inaction in the Russian army and the subsequent emergency removal of the country's defense minister. The question now is how long the army will be built in the right direction.
    laughing
    1. mark1 18 October 2015 11: 43 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: avt
      Quote: mark1
      on the whole, the train of thought is true and historical parallels are very appropriate.

      And what is actually true?

      And what is not true? Do not confuse the club of lovers of alternative history with an attempt to analyze the events of the past in order to prevent the repetition of the same mistakes in the future.
      1. avt
        avt 18 October 2015 12: 56 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: mark1
        ? Do not confuse the club of lovers of alternative history with an attempt to analyze the events of the past in order to prevent the repetition of the same mistakes in the future.

        AnAl from this one should definitely not be confused with reality, and you too will spread in thoughts without knowing the facts. Seek and find. Well, at least the protocol of the NGO meeting on May 9 from 1938, and there you look and what else you want to look from real documents. And who specifically proposed on it a tank with a 76mm gun and at least 30mm armor. You’ll name the name of this traitor, then we’ll speculate for an alternative history and who specifically gushes here.
        1. pilot8878 18 October 2015 19: 39 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: avt
          Here is the name of this ,, traitor "you name, then we will reason for ,, an alternative history"

          Pavlov Dmitry Grigorievich? And the article, unfortunately, is empty. Put a minus and regretted the time spent.
          1. avt
            avt 18 October 2015 20: 23 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: pilot8878
            Pavlov Dmitry Grigorievich?

            And after Gishpanii in January 1938, 76mm is the smallest thing that he required from Kulik for tanks, and 107mm or 122-152mm howitzers
            1. pilot8878 18 October 2015 22: 18 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: avt
              after Gishpanii in January 1938, 76mm is the smallest thing that he demanded for Kulik for tanks

              Wait, isn't it with fall 1937 he was the head of the ABTU when Koshkin issued TZ to a new wheeled-tracked tank with 20 mm armor, which later became the T-34? It’s a pity, before the war, the burden was heavy. Maybe later Katukova would have been no less famous, having gained experience of command.
              1. avt
                avt 19 October 2015 09: 31 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: pilot8878
                Wait, but wasn’t he the head of ABTU since the autumn of 1937

                I don’t remember the exact date of the appointment, and I’m too lazy to look for it, but he participated in the fate of 34ki. Then there was a big argument, well, remember - to put a new tank on wheels or not, well, when Stalin ordered both options not to interfere. And minus the campaign you crept up on the author articles added. laughing
                1. pilot8878 19 October 2015 14: 37 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: avt
                  And minus the campaign, the author of the article crept up to you.

                  Empty, God give him health. wink
  • varov14 20 October 2015 11: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, right away, it’s not yours, just an excuse for a possible current headache. How not to step on the rake, not order, not ours.
    1. Amurets 20 October 2015 15: 38 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      And the article is controversial and controversial comments. This is probably good. Regarding the lack of weapons, I nevertheless agreed with V. Rezun. The fact is that he gives links to memoirs. How he interprets them is his business. But the fact is that the weapons depots and the equipment was indeed relocated to the Western districts of the USSR. V.N.Novikov, who became deputy commissar for small arms in 1941, writes in his book “On the Eve and in the Days of Tests” that he organized the production of a three-ruler in Izhevsk, as the army lacked weapons .Now specifically according to the models. In 1915-16, our Great gunsmith Fedorov wandered around the world in search of weapons. So already at that time he drew attention to the density of light automatic weapons in the ranks of Russia's Western allies. Fedorov in 1912 drew attention to excessive power cartridge of 1908 for automatic weapons and raised the question of an intermediate cartridge of a reduced caliber for automatic weapons. Yes, rifles did not give the necessary density of fire, but at the same time the accuracy of the battle was the three-line guns made and makes it an indispensable sniper weapon. The new automatic and self-loading rifles were highly appreciated by the Germans and Finns for their relatively low weight and reliability. But they did not take root in the Red Army for one simple reason; they required a more thorough pattern and special oils and greases, which he wasn’t in the army. My friend’s father served in the border troops. And he said that they didn’t refuse their DS machine guns, or ABC or SVT rifles. Nearby in UR they were not popular with soldiers because they had to be cleaned more often and And when storming Japanese fortifications, they used only ABC and SVT, since having more power and range these rifles made it possible to solve the tasks of suppressing firing points from a safer distance than the PPSh. I would like to do a more thorough analysis, but let’s dwell on this. There are many reasons and a book should be written to analyze these reasons. All the reasons are given and all of them are acceptable. But they need to be combined with the article and analyzed. Because the shortcomings of our industry are not taken into account . Just do not need about the heroism of the people. The people on their shoulders endured a difficult war. The mistakes were that the production of many strategically important materials was not organized in the necessary quantities.
  • Nehist 18 October 2015 06: 28 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    In many ways, I do not agree with the author; apparently, he does not have enough information about the situation in the Red Army at that time.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 13: 22 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      the author read Rezun and believes that he "broke the covers";)
  • apro 18 October 2015 06: 36 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Itself once decided to understand why the Great Patriotic War passed this way and not otherwise, it brought out for itself one miracle that we won after such defeats and losses, and this miracle was made personally by IVStalin and the CPSU (b), other explanations like the whole people, weather conditions, the best weapons, and the icons of some mother, the help of the allies, and other inventions. They simply forget what Russia was like in the last 50-70 years before the Second Great European Civil War, whose participation in this massacre did not correspond at all to the interests of the state of the peoples of Russia , Russia was a lump of contradictions of mutual distrust, backwardness, the deep Middle Ages backwardness and poverty, inability to satisfy the basic needs of the population and, as a result, passivity and betrayal. IVStalin’s errors are quite predictable, well, he couldn’t make people’s thinking yesterday comparable to European with they are no longer one generation with a nationwide education and bourgeois industrial thinking.
    1. Ostwest 18 October 2015 08: 24 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Tell me the skins went to the population, bast shoes were worn on holidays and lived in dugouts.
      Terrible Stalin spread rot, terrorized and prevented development. Etc. Do not forget about the concentration camps.
      But the fact is that just about 20 years ago, strangers came to power in the country: ovskys and German adorers. Terrorists, murderers and executioners carried out other people's plans and did it effectively, the country was on its knees. It was unlikely that anyone could overcome this plague and get completely ready for the next tests, except for Stalin. No one considered the issue of military invasion paired with that criminal interference in the life of our country in the event that something does not work out for internal enemies, as it was in the pre-war years. Unfortunately, Stalin was simply not able to cope with this multi-headed hydra, pretending to be an international friend.
      There was a purge in the Army, n / a, party, top management, but unfortunately Stalin did not have the opportunities that appear in wartime.
      Thank God, Stalin succeeded, won, and with him the whole nation, but the victory was very difficult, then again the Trotskyist Perlamunder (Khrushchev) came to power. Even in wartime, they were able to mimic, so that later they would again conduct their destructive work.
      How many people have died since they came to power in 1917 are not calculable. None of the people could stand such a thing, but we survived and the merit in this was not only the courage, steadfastness, ingenuity of our people, but also the wisdom and vision of the Stalinist government, which is now being implemented by the Chinese successors.
      The USSR was merged for a long time, in 1991, finally, a Judo affair happened.
      We were lucky with Putin, but what will happen next? God forbid again some kind of fucking or tagged or corn, etc. etc.
      1. corn 18 October 2015 15: 01 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: OstWest
        but also the wisdom and vision of the Stalinist government, today implemented by the Chinese successors.

        ??
        1. corn 18 October 2015 16: 18 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Enlightened minuser.
          At least a couple of insights or wisdom comrade. Stalin, which is now being implemented by Chinese successors.
      2. Uncle 18 October 2015 15: 07 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: OstWest
        The USSR was merged for a long time, in 1991, finally, a Judo affair happened.

        But it seemed to me that the USSR was rotten from the inside. And yesterday was ravaged by communists into separate states.
  • Mountain shooter 18 October 2015 06: 37 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    The author, understand, is easy to criticize THEN when you know everything that happened and the mistakes became clear. The main thing that happened in the summer of 41 was that the soldiers of the Red Army were NOT READY for war morally. Those clashes with Japan and Finland do not count. Really rested - only in Stalingrad. Even in the battle of Moscow, the readiness of the officer corps to fight in a new way was still visible. And technology - and what is technology? When soldiers are controlled by poorly trained commanders who quickly lose touch with higher headquarters and lose initiative, the result is always disastrous. Everything - the Crimean tragedy, and the border battles, and Kharkov - all these are consequences of the moral unwillingness to stand to death in every section where you stand. It is a pity, but this readiness is given only by time and this time was not given to our army.
    1. mark1 18 October 2015 06: 57 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      The author, understand, is easy to criticize THEN when you know everything that happened and the mistakes became clear.

      Errors must be studied and analyzed, everything has the property of repeating itself and is not necessary in the form of a comedy.
    2. Bayonet 18 October 2015 07: 50 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      The author, understand, is easy to criticize THEN when you know everything that happened and the mistakes became clear.

      This is not criticism, but an attempt to analyze the situation before the war. The author expressed his opinion. And here are answers like - "Do not meddle, this is not yours" can not be called constructive. If you think otherwise - provide counterarguments. Truth is born in a dispute. hi
      1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 09: 21 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Bayonet
        In a dispute, truth is born.

        alas, in VO more often in a dispute labels “liberalists” and “cheers-patriots” are born laughing
        as regards the sacred theme of the outbreak of war and the summer disaster - neither Soviet literature on military construction suffered from objectivity, nor do modern "experts" suffer from it. Important, IMHO, the original message. But with the fact that military construction was very diverse, and some of these vectors turned into rudimentary - I think, no doubt.
        1. Bayonet 18 October 2015 09: 30 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Das Boot
          alas, in VO more often in a dispute labels “liberalists” and “cheers-patriots” are born

          That's right - a favorite pastime. smile
      2. Belgorod 18 October 2015 12: 51 New
        • 9
        • 0
        +9
        Guys, the desire to analyze the beginning of the Second World War is commendable, but ...
        And this is the whole thing. author -> author -> author (as you say) burns. My opinion: I heard a ring, but don’t know where he is
        Personally, I have long studied this issue (1941), read everything that came across, searched the Internet
        And now a few facts
        1 In-Arms
        According to the states of 1941, the German company had-, 47 pistols, 16 pistol-guns, 132 carbines, 12 manual guns. A bullet
        In the company of the Red Army -104 self-loading. screw. CBT, 11 screw. Mosin, 9 carbines, 2 snipes. screw, 27 pistol-guns, 22 pistols, 2 machine tools. machine gun, 10 man. a bullet.
        Interesting, huh?
        The Germans have carbines, and the Unas SVT. Now screams will begin that there were no SVT in the troops. And they were. Search the Internet, and also type captured weapons in the Wehrmacht
        Add SVT was released about 1,5 million units.
        2 Cavleria
        In the Red Army, the cavalry was of the DRAGON type, that is, the horse served as a means of transportation. There weren’t enough cars in the army, but there wasn’t any armored personnel carriers. The Red Army was able to conduct offensive operations to great depths only after the troops were saturated with American and English equipment. And the cavalry corps were disbanded to create tank armored units.
        3 Tanks
        Tanks is a separate song, my love. I began to study the history of the Second World War from tanks. But in short ..
        In 1940, there were 9 tank corps in the Red Army, and then in 41 they began to form 21 more. There are 1031 tanks in each corps. (According to the standard, 100! Hours were allocated for a march of 48 km.) Tank battalions were withdrawn from infantry divisions. The former co-drivers were appointed commanders, and then they commanded tanks like horses (anyone interested can go to the site "I remember" and read the memories of tankers)
        And believe me about tanks, I can write so many facts ...
        I put a minus to the author (it’s a pity that I can’t put it very bold). Yes, it is necessary to raise the topic of the defeat of the Red Army in 1941, but do not write nonsense !!!!!
        1. Mikado 19 October 2015 18: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          According to SVT, a bunch of photos of fighters with them remained in 41-42 years. It is clear that the armament of the rifle company could be significantly different from the states you cited, but the author really wrote something wrong. In fact, the production of SVT was reduced in favor of the production of PPSh in 1941, as a necessary measure, to saturate troops with automatic weapons, but less labor-intensive and expensive to manufacture than SVT. Then, after the losses incurred, the quantity was more important.
          Thank you so much for mentioning the cavalry tactics, so that no one would think that we rushed at tanks with drafts.
          If you take into account the "tank disputes", I liked how they sorted this question out on the shelves of Svirin and Isaev.
          1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 21: 32 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            And the Germans got a bunch of CBT right from the warehouses. More than 90%. In the USSR, only the Marines were massively armed with them.
            On the shelves of tanks, the Germans simply knocked out Soviet aircraft concentrated by the traitor from headquarters at the main airfields, then knocked out tanker tankers remaining yueh fighter cover. Most of the tanks they got intact, intact for the development of fuel, they usually converted them into self-propelled guns.
            The rout was very programmed and controlled ...
  • Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 06: 50 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    "" "The number of purges, arrests and executions in the country has become much less" ""
    and before that, apparently, they were only doing this - they were cleaning, arresting and shooting! the author apparently desired fame Madame Aleksievich
    because of such statues I call the site "yellow"
    1. Petrof 18 October 2015 09: 17 New
      • -4
      • 0
      -4
      Quote: Russian Uzbek
      and before that, apparently, they were only doing this - they were cleaning, arresting and shooting!


      exactly
      scale of repression
      I read the Red Army man and the Red Navy magazine, for the thirties, and for the sake of interest on the Internet, I followed the fate of the authors of the articles and those who were written about (this is a matter of minutes) - more than half were repressed, or rather 90 percent, and these were all military.
      flaunts today in a magazine - and in a month .... of that
      I know the same thing from my family
      1. MrK
        MrK 18 October 2015 11: 33 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: Petrof
        exactly
        scale of repression
        I read the Red Army man and the Red Navy magazine, for the thirties, and for the sake of interest on the Internet, I followed the fate of the authors of the articles and those who were written about (this is a matter of minutes) - more than half were repressed, or rather 90 percent, and these were all military.


        The scale of the repression went off scale, say. How some colleagues like to repeat liberal dogma.
        Let's get a look. Until now, there are allegations of a "decapitated" army, which is directly depopulated. Fantastic, wild, unmatched figures - almost 43 000 of “executed” officers and generals in two years. According to Volkogonov.
        Alas, alas ... Despite the numerous anecdotes, statistics are still science accurate. In 1937, with the number of officers in the 144 300 officers corps, about eight percent were repressed and excluded from the army of 11 034 people — about eight percent! In 1938, from 179 000 commanders and generals were repressed and not restored to the rights of 6742 man - three with a small percentage! So, in 1937-38 years about 20 thousand people were dismissed from the army. But it was returned to operation after the change of leadership of the NKVD in 1939 year - 12,5 thousand. It turns out about 60%.

        Those. were arrested - 8122 officer and general. And far from all on political charges, and far from all were shot.
        By 1940, the Red Army had grown from 500 000 (in 1930 year) to 4,9 million people. How many officers did it take? Statistics show that the percentage of officers in the troops in the 1938 year increased by 5%, in 1939 - by 7,5%. And with a higher military education - by 12%. And this despite the repression [
        But we must also take into account that “repressions” often did not concern politics: other comrade commanders were thrown out of the army for embezzlement, drunkenness, or one or another omission in the service. Do you seriously believe that under Stalin the quartermasters didn’t grab public property, and the brave warriors didn’t shoot drunk from personal weapons somewhere in dances? Girls not raped? Muzzles "spacers" did not beat? Wow! In the old archives such arts are remembered, which will not be let down in any army of the world.
        From the book: [Kurlandchik A.– “THE CURSED SOVIET AUTHORITY” ... on Proza.ru]
        1. Petrof 18 October 2015 12: 44 New
          • -3
          • 0
          -3
          Quote: mrark
          the quartermasters didn’t grab public property, and the brave warriors didn’t shoot drunk from personal weapons somewhere in the dance?


          Hapali and scorched, as at all times, about which there are corresponding orders
          and nevertheless - find the magazine indicated by me on the Internet and see for yourself, it will be best to see with your own eyes.

          "... as we move forward, the resistance of the capitalist elements will increase, the class struggle will intensify, and the Soviet government, whose forces will increase more and more, will pursue a policy of isolating these elements, a policy of decaying the enemies of the working class, and finally, politics suppressing the resistance of the exploiters ... "(c) Stalin

          What do you think - should the relevant authorities comply with this instruction?
          did not hear about Yezhov’s hands?

          We are the protection of millions
          We are the protection of all countries
          From traitors, spies,
          Arsonists of war.
          To saboteurs - there is no mercy!
          Our squad is invincible
          Drop by drop blood if necessary
          We will give the people!
          (C)

          yeah sure



          In his memoirs, Marshal of the Soviet Union A.I. Eremenko described the repressions in the Red Army as follows:

          Comrade Stalin was significantly guilty of exterminating the military personnel before the war, which affected the combat effectiveness of the army.

          Opinion of the Army General A.V. Gorbatov:

          It was believed that the enemy was advancing so quickly due to the surprise of his attack and because Germany had placed industry in almost all of Europe at its service. Of course it was. But I was swept up by my previous fears: how will we fight, having lost so many experienced commanders before the war? This, undoubtedly, was at least one of the main reasons for our failures, although they did not talk about it or presented it as if 1937-1938, having cleared the army of "traitors", increased its power.

          Marshal of the Soviet Union A.M. Vasilevsky believed that the repressions of 1937 played a significant role in the history of the USSR:

          Without the thirty-seventh year, perhaps there would have been no war at all in the forty-first year. In the fact that Hitler decided to start the war in the forty-first year, an important role was played by the assessment of the degree of defeat of the military personnel that we had.


          According to Rokossovsky’s great-granddaughter, who referred to the stories of Marshal Kazakov’s wife, Rokossovsky was tortured. The head of the Leningrad UNKVD Zakovsky took part in these tortures. Rokossovsky was knocked out several of his front teeth, three ribs were broken, he was beaten on the toes with a hammer, and in 1939 he was taken to the prison yard for execution and was given a blank shot. (from)

          but read about the creator of SAMBO Oshchepkova - how could a Japanese spy, but without him we would not have had this fight
          1. Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 13: 20 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            "" "Search the Internet for the magazine I indicated and see for yourself" "- will you be convinced of what?
            no one here disputes that the purges were, do not agree with the scale! you need to see the coast a little - Mr. Petroffff ...
            and then you probably imagined that here is the site "Facets" or "echo of Moscow" and you can write any bilieberda ...
            here, of course, "jaundice" but not to the same extent!
            1. Petrof 18 October 2015 13: 32 New
              • -3
              • 0
              -3
              Quote: Russian Uzbek
              disagree with the scale!


              if in the military magazine where both the ordinary military and the military elite are published, most of the authors were shot - this says that the scale was

              Quote: Russian Uzbek
              and you can write any bilieberda ..


              and the above mentioned military is also probably in your every rubbish wrote about the repression
              and why would it?
              1. Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 13: 52 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                "" and the above-mentioned military are also probably in your every rubbish wrote about the repression ""
                they wrote that the repressions WERE ... and that TOGETHER WITH THE ENEMIES were repressed and innocent ...
                or do you want to say that they wrote like you: "the scale of repression went off scale" ???
                tell your fables to someone else
                "" "if in the military journal where both the ordinary military and the military elite are published, most of the authors were shot - this says that the scale was still" ""
                so the repressions mainly affected the high command ... starting with regiment commanders! at least you’ve got acquainted with the essence of the matter and at the same time with the history of your native country ... for which these people were generally repressed! otherwise you poke some sort of magazine and even a communist one ... and is this your "reinforced concrete" argument?
                1. Petrof 18 October 2015 13: 55 New
                  • -4
                  • 0
                  -4
                  Quote: Russian Uzbek
                  or do you want to say that they wrote like you: "the scale of repression went off scale" ???


                  that’s what they wrote
                  they cannot be understood in any other way, as if the Stalinists did not want to
                  1. Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 14: 13 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Well, that moment has come;)
                    who wrote and where? quote link to the studio!
                    1. Petrof 18 October 2015 14: 25 New
                      • -3
                      • 0
                      -3
                      My God, and for whom did I give links before?

                      Well, for example:
                      Army General A.V. Gorbatov

                      It was believed that the enemy was advancing so quickly due to the surprise of his attack and because Germany had placed industry in almost all of Europe at its service. Of course it was. But I was swept up by my previous fears: how will we fight, having lost so many experienced commanders before the war? This, undoubtedly, was at least one of the main reasons for our failures, although they did not talk about it or presented the case as if 1937-1938, having cleared the army of "traitors", increased its power.
                      Years and wars
                      http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/gorbatov/06.html


                      without Stalin ... maybe there would have been no war ”and even that“ without the thirty-seventh year, perhaps there would have been no war at all in the forty-first year. In the fact that Hitler decided to start the war in the forty-first year, an important role was played by the assessment of the degree of defeat of the military personnel that we had ... (From an interview with Marshal of the Soviet Union Vasilyevsky A.M. Konstantin Simonov, 1967 Simonov KS “ Through the eyes of a person of my generation ")
                      1. Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 14: 36 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Well...
                        and what does Gorbatov reflect on? about the "loss of experienced commanders"! the numbers given to you above are how much was it in percent and numbers
                        I’ll repeat it once again: the repressions in the army mainly touched the highest commanders! The same Gorbatov might never have become a general if the top army had not been repressed ... look at what ranks the WWII commanders had in 36-37 ...
                        Now, if you wrote "the scale of repression among the ruling elite went off scale" - you would have hit the nail on the head;)
                      2. Petrof 18 October 2015 14: 47 New
                        • -2
                        • 0
                        -2
                        Quote: Russian Uzbek
                        the numbers given to you above are how much was it in percent and numbers



                        Army General says that punitive bodies shot a lot of experienced commanders, "traitors" - pay attention in quotation marks because of which the rout and disaster

                        Vasilevsky - the marshal of victory, yes - says that without a mass execution of military commanders by Stalin and war, there could have been no

                        and you say that you know better than them (people who lived, fought, commanded) the situation
                        great what can you say
                      3. Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 14: 57 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        "" without Stalin ... maybe there would have been no war "" "
                        you don’t distort the phrases here, write down completely what he said ... without your distortions
                        "" "Vasilevsky - the marshal of victory, yes - says that without a mass execution of military commanders by Stalin and war, there could have been no" ""
                        maybe there wasn’t ... maybe not an argument
                        Vasilevsky incidentally does not condemn Stalin anywhere - on the contrary, he writes that "Victory is Stalin"
                        but how do you juggle phrases and quotes taken out of context that the school gives you know ...
                        in principle, talking with you, I realized - that put you on a par with the Nobel laureate Aleksievich quite rightly
                        you can be proud;)
                      4. Petrof 18 October 2015 15: 12 New
                        • -2
                        • 0
                        -2
                        what is taken out of context?

                        What about the consequences for the army of the thirty-seventh to thirty-eighth year? You say that without the thirty-seventh year there would have been no defeats for the forty-first, and I will say more. Without the thirty-seventh year, perhaps there would have been no war at all in the forty-first year. In the fact that Hitler decided to start the war in the forty-first year, an important role was played by the assessment of the degree of defeat of military personnel that we had. What can I say, when in the thirty-ninth year I had to be on the commission during the transfer of the Leningrad Military District from Khozin to Meretskov, there were a number of divisions commanded by the captains, because everyone who was above was arrested without exception.
                        (C)
                        Through the eyes of a person of my generation: Reflections on I.V. Stalin
                        Conversations with the Marshal of the Soviet Union A.M. Vasilevsky

                        author Simonov

                        what can you somehow understand differently than what I said?

                        as I understand it, there is nothing to say about Army General Gorbatov
                      5. Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 15: 21 New
                        • -1
                        • 0
                        -1
                        so what Vasilevsky condemned Stalin? said "Stalin was wrong when he repressed all these people"?
                        he just said, “if there were no repression, the war MAY BE, and it didn’t start” ... or maybe it started ... history does not know the subjunctive mood
                        this is your distortion
                        "" without Stalin ... maybe there would have been no war "" "
                        here’s another example - Vasilevsky didn’t say that you turned the phrase
                        Vasilevsky generally spoke as a military man, from the point of view of the military ... no political sense should be attributed to his words
                      6. Petrof 18 October 2015 15: 28 New
                        • -2
                        • 0
                        -2
                        Quote: Russian Uzbek
                        so what Vasilevsky condemned Stalin? said "Stalin was wrong when he repressed all these people"?


                        that's exactly what he said
                        once again his quote is -
                        and I will say more. Without the thirty-seventh year, perhaps there would have been no war at all in the forty-first year. In the fact that Hitler decided to start the war in the forty-first year, an important role was played by the assessment of the degree of defeat of military personnel that we had. (from)

                        who is to blame for this, who else but Stalin can be to blame for this?

                        the defeat of military personnel - what does it mean in your opinion?
                      7. Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 16: 23 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        so what Vasilevsky condemned Stalin? said "Stalin was wrong when he repressed all these people"?
                        Well, where is it in the quote you quoted?
                        I tell you once again Vasilevsky as a military man said, taking into account the past war
                        "" "who is to blame for this, who, if not Stalin, can be to blame for this?" ""
                        all this is your personal, backed up only by speculation taken out of context phrases, Vasilevsky didn’t say so ... Gorbatov, by the way, too
                      8. vladimirZ 18 October 2015 18: 29 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        so what Vasilevsky condemned Stalin? said "Stalin was wrong when he repressed all these people"
                        - Russian Uzbek (1)

                        All these marshals and generals in post-war memoirs, in order to preserve their posts, to please Khrushchev and his followers, hiding their miscalculations and mistakes, poured mud on Stalin as best they could, putting the blame on him.
                        Exception, not betraying I.V. Stalin Marshal of the Soviet Union K. Rokossovsky and Chief Marshal of Aviation Golovanov A.E., who refused to defame I.V. Stalin, and confirm Khrushchev’s lie that "Stalin led military operations around the globe."
                        For this, Khrushchev and his supporters pursued the unbroken Rokossovsky and Golovanov, stripping them of their posts, dismissing Golovanov from the Army, and Rokossovsky into the group of "honored pensioners" - inspectors general of the Moscow Region.
                        So that it is necessary to read the memoirs of our marshals and generals, taking into account this feature of a weak human character, subject to pressure from the power-owning leaders of our state and to conceal their miscalculations and errors in their activities in the prewar and war years.
                    2. Mikado 20 October 2015 13: 59 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Let me express my humble opinion about whether the war would have happened, if there had not been repressions of the 37th year.
                      Hitler tensed a little after Khalkhin-Gol, for the defeat of the Japanese was quick and crushing, moreover, in the operation planned and imposed on us by the Japanese themselves.
                      Hitler’s opinion of our army was rather spoiled by the Finnish war.
                      Training, the condition of the troops, and commanders including, in the 30s left much to be desired. The army was built from scratch, not really knowing how to do it. And it was precisely the shots of the civil war that prepared it.
                      Again, it was precisely following the Finnish War that the army carried out a number of reforms and innovations, improved training, but there was very little time left ..

                      As Isaev wrote remarkably, the situation about the construction, training, training of our army compared to the Wehrmacht resembled the following analogy: a boy is engaged in boxing in a village club. They learn it somehow, the simulators are unimportant, he makes certain successes, even wins over the same ones. And at one point, a professional boxer calls him to battle.

                      Well, as for the personnel - it seems to me that few of the commanders of the Civil War proved themselves properly in the Great Patriotic War. so to speak, these were people of a different time, and the Civil War school rather negatively affected their military talents.

                      Best regards hi
  • avt
    avt 18 October 2015 20: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Petrof
    "... as we move forward, the resistance of the capitalist elements will increase, the class struggle will intensify, and the Soviet government, whose forces will increase more and more, will pursue a policy of isolating these elements, a policy of decaying the enemies of the working class, and finally, politics suppressing the resistance of the exploiters ... "(c) Stalin

    laughing Did you cite this as evidence of Stalin’s paranoid? And you don’t want to remember the year 1991? Well, who turned out to be right? What did History show in the end?
    Quote: Petrof
    Without the thirty-seventh year, perhaps there would have been no war at all in the forty-first year. In the fact that Hitler decided to start the war in the forty-first year, an important role was played by the assessment of the degree of defeat of the military personnel that we had.

    And what if without Svanidzemelechskopivovarov chants and think? Well just think? Maybe without Chamberlain’s Munich conspiracy? When exactly from that moment on did they throw sweet pieces to him in the East direction, and Stalin was forbidden to lead troops through Poland to fulfill the mutual assistance agreement signed with Czechoslovakia?
    1. Petrof 18 October 2015 20: 45 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Quote: avt
      Do you want to remember 1991?


      But is it not the Communists who arranged the collapse of the country?
      where does the class struggle and the exploiters
      ordinary palace coup


      Quote: avt
      Svanidzemelechskopivarovskih chants



      this is the marshal of victory said
      and there would be no repression, thought, thought Hitler
      Yes, and would go to England
      Sea lion jumped - they would write in our newspapers

      and Comrade Stalin would send the Red Army to Afghanistan and India

      But we still get to the Ganges,
      But we still die in battles,
      So from Japan to England
      My Motherland shone.

      (C)
      1. avt
        avt 19 October 2015 10: 45 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Petrof
        But is it not the Communists who arranged the collapse of the country?
        where does the class struggle and the exploiters
        ordinary palace coup

        Yeah? And who jumped into the capitalists from the party committees? Or is there a class of proprietors that is missing in our country? Well, when and where did the palace coup end with the breakdown of the social system in our case with the appearance of the aforementioned class of capitalists ?? laughing
  • ASK505 19 October 2015 11: 49 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Petrof
    Without the thirty-seventh year, perhaps there would have been no war at all in the forty-first year. In the fact that Hitler decided to start the war in the forty-first year, an important role was played by the assessment of the degree of defeat of the military personnel that we had.


    For a long time, they put an end to supposedly killed innocently. And you are for the old, in unison with our sworn friends.
    “Who says I'm going to start a war, like these fools did in 1914? - asked Hitler, referring to the First World War, and explained: - We will have friends who will help us in all enemy states. We will be able to make such friends. Confusion in the minds, conflicting feelings, indecision, panic - these are our weapons ...
    So could Stalin allow the Germans in the Soviet Union to repeat their exploits at the expense of local traitors?
    In the years 1937-1938, Joseph W. Davis was the US ambassador to the USSR. After the German attack on the USSR, he wrote in his diary on July 7, 1941:
    “... Today, we know, thanks to the efforts of the FBI, that Hitler’s bodies acted everywhere, even in the United States and South America. The German entry into Prague was accompanied by active support from the Helena military organizations. The same thing happened in Norway (Quisling), Slovakia (Tiso), Belgium (de Grem) ... However, we do not see anything like this in Russia. "Where are the Russian accomplices of Hitler?" - they ask me often. “They were shot,” I reply. Only now are you beginning to realize how far-sighted the Soviet government did during the years of purging. ”

    After all, he is accused of repressions against the "fifth column" of Nazis in the USSR, that is, they are accused of using which he saved both the USSR and all of Europe from German Nazism. Indeed, at that time, all the countries that succeeded did the same thing as Stalin did - they cleaned their countries of the “fifth column” without any court or investigation. And after its own mass repressions in their countries, the West accuses Stalin of repressing the “fifth column” ?! How else to call it, if not an extreme degree of meanness?
  • pilot8878 19 October 2015 12: 11 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Ms. Petrof, and for the sake of your overall development and interest, now look at the years of publication of the "revealing masterpieces" you indicated - they all went on sale under the unforgettable Nikita the maize. Without such attacks, memoirs would not have appeared at all.
    At the same time, ask about K.K. Rokossovsky. Yes, he was arrested, tortured, but at the same time, he NEVER allowed himself insulting attacks on Stalin, moreover, this was one of the reasons for the poor relationship between Marshal and Khrushchev. Rokossovsky perfectly understood that the bestiality of the investigator did not give grounds for insulting Stalin.
  • Russian Uzbek 18 October 2015 13: 16 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Well, I’m saying: with Aunt Alexievich next to you, sit down and cry to each other in a vest ...
  • ASK505 19 October 2015 11: 32 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Dear Julia, the beginning of the sentence, proper names, the name of cities, countries and continents in Russian and other foreign languages ​​is written with a capital letter. Offers end with a period. By the way. Why? In relation to each person’s own language, one can absolutely accurately judge not only his cultural level, but also his civic values. True love for your country is unthinkable without love for your language. And like Pushkin: “... we’ll part for this, forgive me!”
  • sl22277 18 October 2015 07: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    A serious analysis is needed, because not only the Red Army, but also the armies of Western countries were inferior to the Hitler war machine, which was gaining strength and experience in the war, initially with Europe. I do not agree with the author, it is not for him to give an assessment to Stalin and the leaders of the Red Army. Who won this war, and did not lie under the Germans, the same example is Europe.
    1. Petrof 18 October 2015 09: 19 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: sl22277
      not him to give an assessment to Stalin and the leaders of the Red Army.


      and to whom?
      1. MrK
        MrK 18 October 2015 11: 36 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Quote: Petrof
        and to whom?

        Only to you.
        1. Petrof 18 October 2015 12: 51 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: mrark
          Only to you.


          but I think that all people living in the Russian Federation
  • The lead 18 October 2015 07: 56 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Bullshit, not an article. Just to write something. How was the 6th mechanized corps with its thousand tanks shot by aviation and, oh god, artillery? Well, at least I didn’t write about V-2. The reason for the corps’s defeat was this ( a friend’s father fought on t-34 at 6mk): the command took the equipment out of the camp and the Germans airstrike fell on an empty field. A package was opened with orders in case of the outbreak of hostilities, which was ordered to advance in the direction of Brest. It was assumed that the enemy would wedge into the defense of rifle divisions, it will strike at the front with a strike of 14mk, and at the flank of 6mk. However, a difficult situation developed near Grodno, which was revealed to the high command, so an order was issued to counter-strike 6mk towards Grodno. 6mk at that time was moving on Brest, therefore, turned 180 degrees and went to Grodno. While he was carrying out all these maneuvers, a thousand tanks and the darkness of cars and tractors burned up the remaining fuel, which ended, and 6 mk did not reach Grodno. The fact is that aviation it immediately destroyed the fuel reserves of 6 microns, and the nearest warehouses were in the east of Belarus and could not be delivered, as enemy aircraft dominated the roads, and railway junctions were subjected to continuous bombardments.
  • alicante11 18 October 2015 08: 41 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    M-yes, everyone imagines himself a strategist seeing the battle from the side.
    The problems of the Red Army in the 1941 year can be represented as follows. The first is growth problems.
    Due to the first problem, the Red Army did not have enough high-quality command personnel. Well, we did not have a system in place, as in the Reichswehr Sect, when each ordinary student studied for sergeant major, and each non-commissioned officer. As a result, if it was necessary to deploy new divisions, the Germans simply took a frame - the backbone of the existing division, replenished it with reservists. This seriously reduced the time required to prepare combat-ready divisions created during mobilization and did not have a serious impact on the combat effectiveness of the first-line divisions, since the excess of trained personnel made it possible to qualitatively replace the vacancies formed. In the Red Army, this was not and could not be. Because we did not intend to attack anyone, but when attacking us, it’s already very problematic to remove the shot from the division that is fighting.
    For this reason, the quality of management was very low, especially in the link from the division and above. And there was no interaction between the combat arms.
    The second problem is the strategic and tactical surprise of the attack. The rearmament program of the Red Army was planned before the 1943 year. Considering the experience of WWI and his experience in the Finnish campaign during the breakthrough of the Mannerheim Line, the Soviet leadership believed that he had this time. This led to a redrawing of the structure of the compounds. Especially in the tank troops. As a result, it turned out that the divisions had several types of tanks, a common tank non-kit, a second set of aircraft at airfields, etc. Therefore, the tank troops and aviation just could not play a decisive role in the border battle. At the same time, rifle divisions, for the sake of forming the 30MK, were left without their tank battalions, which naturally weakened them, and tank brigades that could interact with infantry units were also disbanded. Hence the fears of mobilization, because they remembered from the WWII - mobilization is a war. And they counted on diplomatic maneuvers to provide extra time. Hitler failed to achieve operational surprise. Parts of the western districts were raised in alarm and began to take up positions on the cover plan. Also began to pull up reserves. Well, tactical surprise is simple enough. The exact date of the enemy’s advance is known only to him. And that is not always the case, for example, the Germans initially planned an attack in May of the 41, but the situation in Yugoslavia confused the plans and forced the attack to be postponed.
    One can cite a whole range of reasons that have already been discussed more than once - from the wider experience of the Wehrmacht, which has already conquered all of Europe, to the "dampness" of our latest developments in the field of weapons, when indeed more tanks were lost due to malfunctions on marches than due to enemy exposure.
    1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 10: 51 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: alicante11
      The problems of the Red Army in the 1941 year can be represented as follows. The first is growth problems.
      Due to the first problem, the Red Army did not have enough high-quality command personnel.

      undoubtedly. As well as the depressing general preparation of the Red Army. As well as inept command and control. But this conclusion was made already in 1940 after the Winter War - the only one at that time modern war in which the USSR participated. By the beginning of the Second World War, nothing in this regard had changed dramatically - just as in the Winter War I had to learn to fight “in the field”.
      Quote: alicante11
      The second problem is the strategic and tactical surprise of the attack.

      the mantra of "treacherous and sudden", of course, is very convenient from the point of view of propaganda and school textbooks. It seems to me very doubtful that the successes of the Wehrmacht in the 41-42th years. are based on the fact that he fell upon us without first "coming to you."
      1. Petrof 18 October 2015 10: 58 New
        • -2
        • 0
        -2
        Quote: Das Boot
        the only one at that time in the modern war in which the USSR participated


        and Halkin goal showing for example the importance of aviation?
        has something changed since then? never mind
        Smushkevich was shot
        1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 11: 52 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Petrof
          and Halkin Goal

          sorry but i talked about the war. What does the Hal have to do with itхin-gol? This incident, by the way, was not considered by Joseph Vissarionitch to be a "war."
          1. Bayonet 18 October 2015 12: 42 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Das Boot
            This incident, by the way, was not considered by Joseph Vissarionitch to be a "war."

            Wow, the “incident” - by the beginning of the Soviet counteroffensive, Zhukov’s 1st Army Group had about 57 thousand people, 542 guns and mortars, 498 tanks, 385 armored vehicles and 515 combat aircraft.
            1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 13: 00 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Bayonet
              Wow "incident"

              Small episodes in Manchuria, near Lake Hassan or in Mongolia - this is nonsense, this is not war - these are separate episodes on a patch of strictly limited. Japan was afraid to start a war, we didn’t want that either, and some test of strength on the patch showed that Japan had failed. They had 2-3 divisions and we have 2-3 divisions in Mongolia, the same number on Hassan. Our army has not yet waged a real, serious war. Stalin I.V. From "Speech at a meeting of commanding officers to summarize the experience of military operations against Finland" on April 17, 1940
          2. Petrof 18 October 2015 13: 03 New
            • -3
            • 0
            -3
            interesting and those who participated there - they also believed that they were not in the war, what do you think?

            According to official Soviet data, the losses of the Japanese-Manchu troops during the battles from May to September 1939 amounted to more than 61 thousand people. killed, wounded and taken prisoner (of which about 20 thousand - actually Japanese losses). Soviet-Mongolian troops lost 9831 Soviet (together with the wounded - more than 17 thousand) and 895 Mongolian soldiers.

            The officially declared losses of the Kwantung Army: 18 thousand people. Independent Japanese researchers give figures up to 45 thousand people. (from)

            isn't it too cool for an incident?
            not a simple shootout of border guards yet

            Song of the wind rush over the country
            To hear the Soviet people
            About the brave sons,
            Khalkhin Gola Fighters
            About a mighty and formidable campaign

            In a roadless, waterless desert
            They brought the glory of the country.
            The enemy found the grave
            On the Khalkhin Gol River
            On the borders of Mongolian land.

            (C)

            in any case, it was necessary to make changes - they did not
            the dominance of Japanese aviation in the air at the beginning of the conflict taught nothing, then all this repeated with much worse consequences
            1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 13: 52 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Petrof
              interesting and those who participated there - they also believed that they were not in the war, what do you think?

              Quote: Petrof
              Song of the wind rush over the country

              Dear, if this is a matter of terminology, then personally for me it is completely closed by Comrade Stalin and my grandfather, who took part in the conflict. Besides,
              as personal experience shows, arguing with a lover of heroic-patriotic poetry is a thankless task. Take for sim and so on.
              1. Petrof 18 October 2015 14: 20 New
                • -3
                • 0
                -3
                Quote: Das Boot
                argue with a lover of heroic-patriotic poetry


                poetry poetry but you didn’t see it?

                in any case, it was necessary to make changes - they did not
                the dominance of Japanese aviation in the air at the beginning of the conflict did not teach anything, then all this repeated with much worse consequences (c) of self-citation

                or in your local wars do not need to learn?
                1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 15: 18 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Petrof
                  the dominance of Japanese aviation in the air at the beginning of the conflict taught nothing, then all this repeated with much worse consequences

                  ?
                  In mid-June, the forces of the RKKVF were twice as superior to the Japanese and equal in numbers to all Japanese fleet located in Manchuria and Korea in general. The superiority in the air as a whole was from the beginning of the conflict to its end. By definition, there was no "dominance" in the air of the Japanese. Another thing is that Khalkhin-Gol became the epitaph of I-15 and kawasaki ki-10 - biplane fighters went down in history. Plus tactics of warfare by the Japanese. Plus, their underestimation of bomber aircraft and attack airfields. Etc. On the whole, I agree that the air war over Khalkhin Gol was unprecedented - up to the Second World War / WWII. But the "Japanese" lessons did not work against the Luftwaffe.
                  1. Petrof 18 October 2015 15: 26 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Das Boot
                    By definition, there was no "dominance" in the air of the Japanese


                    from 4. 50 look, there it is told about it
                    1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 18: 24 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: Petrof
                      from 4. 50 look, there it is told about it

                      facespalm. However, Julia (by the way, excuse me for contacting you with a gender error) is excusable. I would also understand if Sekigava or Kutsevalov were brought as an argument, but these craftsmen of the television men ... thank you, I closed the topic.
                      1. Petrof 18 October 2015 18: 59 New
                        • -4
                        • 0
                        -4
                        [
                        Quote: Das Boot
                        but these do-it-yourself TV stuff


                        May 28, the commander of the 57th Special Rifle Corps, Commander N.F. Feklenko in a combat report on the progress of battles in the Khalkhin-Gol river region reported to B.M. Shaposhnikov the following:

                        "I ask you to immediately give an answer, as this is due to the planning of the battle on May 29

                        1. Enemy aviation dominates the air.

                        2. The west bank of the river. Khalkhin-Gol is completely open and does not give any maneuver, with the exception of the Dzuk-Khan-Ula mountain region, where the terrain is easily rugged.

                        3. Our aircraft are not able to cover the ground forces before capturing the crossing ...

                        4. It is possible to keep the eastern bank of the Khalkhin-Gol river, but with heavy losses from enemy aircraft.

                        5. I ask that after dark, withdraw units to the west bank and defend it by conducting bombing of the enemy ...

                        The measures were taken the most radical. On May 29, three Douglas type passenger planes flew from Moscow by special flight to Mongolia. On board were 48 experienced Soviet pilots who had completed a military school in the skies of Spain and China. Among them were 22 Heroes of the Soviet Union. The head of the group of domestic aces was the deputy commander of the Air Force of the Red Army, commander Ya.V. Smushkevich. A few days later, the Douglas landed at the Tamtsak-Bulak airfield. (from)
                      2. Das Boot 18 October 2015 19: 56 New
                        • -2
                        • 0
                        -2
                        Quote: Petrof
                        May 28, the commander of the 57th Special Rifle Corps, Commander N.F. Feklenko ... the following:

                        oh yes - Feklenko smile Of course. If this loser had stayed a bit longer than Comcor-57, Khalkhin-Gol would inevitably be merged, among other things, due to the "dominance of the Japanese in the air" and other things, "chief, everything was lost!". By the way, it’s amazing how it’s not ... However, not about that.
                        On 27.05.1939/XNUMX/XNUMX our air group in Mongolia consisted of 203 machines: 48 I-15bis; 51 I-16; 88 SB: 16 P-5. Japanese: 52 fighters, 6 scouts, 6 light bombers; total - 64 cars. Ok, let’s leave the Kwantung reports of the shot down and Feklenko’s panic - where is Japanese dominance? Or start about "ki-27 vs I-16"?
                      3. Petrof 18 October 2015 20: 17 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        From the story of fighter pilot Anton Yakimenko: “The war began unsuccessfully for us. The Japanese managed to seize dominance in the air. Why did it happen? We met Japanese veterans over Khalkhin Gol, who had fought in China for two years before that. We had no combat experience and were not ready to kill yet. ”
                        http://topwar.ru/21990-samurayskaya-mogila-halhin-gol.html

                        Thus, the May battle was 17: 1 in favor of Japanese aviation. After this defeat, Soviet fighters did not appear over Khalkhin Gol for more than two weeks, and "Japanese bombers bombed our troops with impunity."
                        Moscow responded immediately by taking emergency measures to strengthen our aircraft in the conflict zone. Already on May 29, a group of the best Soviet aces headed by the deputy chief of the Red Army Air Force flew to Mongolia
                        (c) I fought with samurai. From Khalkhin Gol to Port Arthur
    2. w3554152 19 October 2015 22: 22 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Quote: Petrof
      Smushkevich was shot


      Sadness, but for the cause they shot, like Pavlov, Tukhachevsky and many others with and without stripes. And those millions of soldiers who fell on the battlefield because of the Tukhachev’s Smushkevichs and Pavlov’s do you feel sorry?
  • alicante11 19 October 2015 05: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    undoubtedly. As well as the depressing general preparation of the Red Army. As well as inept command and control. But this conclusion was already made in 1940 after the Winter War - the only modern war at that time,


    And what could be drastically changed over the remaining year and a half?

    It seems to me very doubtful that the success of the Wehrmacht in the 41-42 years. are based on the fact that he fell upon us without first "coming to you."


    This is not the main reason, but very significant. Moreover, tactical surprise is less terrible. Strategic surprise brought more problems. Which led to the fact that army reform planning was attributed to 1942-1943gg. As a result, the old staff structures were destroyed and the new ones did not have time to create.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • creak 18 October 2015 11: 12 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: alicante11

    M-yes, everyone imagines himself a strategist seeing the battle from the side. The problems of the Red Army in 1941 can be represented as follows. The first is the problem of growth. Due to the first problem, the Red Army did not have enough high-quality command personnel


    And this is the first and main - the Commander of the Kiev Special Military District Kirponos during the Finnish War commanded the division ... He commanded the Golden Zveeda well and deservedly. But after a short command of the rifle corps, he received a district where four armies and eight mechanized corps were stationed ... Was he ready to manage such a colossus with experience - of course not ... This was noted in his memoirs by Rokossovsky and Bagramyan serving under the command of Kyroponos ..
    And although the catastrophe did not happen there in the early days, it nevertheless occurred in mid-September where Kirponos died in the Kiev boiler ...
    PS This happened despite the fact that many units showed stamina and fought very worthily ...
    It was not fault, but the misfortune of many commanders - no personal courage can replace the corresponding experience and knowledge of military art ....
    Other important factors also played a role, and converging together they formed a critical mass that determined what happened in the summer of 1941 with the Red Army ...
    1. alicante11 19 October 2015 05: 36 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      And although the catastrophe did not happen there in the early days, it nevertheless occurred in mid-September where Kirponos died in the Kiev boiler ...


      I basically agree.
      The catastrophe did not happen, mainly because the Germans did not deliver the main blow at the front of the Southwestern Front. If there were not one tank group, but two and two air fleets against the SWF, then the situation would not be much better than what happened in the WWF.
      Well, plus Potopov with his 5 Army did a lot in order not to turn the border battle into a rout of the South Front.
      And in September there is not Kirponos’s wine there. He sent the front lines to the east, and requested a retreat. But Shaposhnikov and the IVS were banned. In principle, this victim was justified by the delay in Guderian’s advance on Moscow. But for those who sacrificed from this is not much easier.
      1. creak 19 October 2015 09: 28 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: alicante11
        And in September there is not Kirponos’s wine there.

        But let me disagree with this - how could the Kleist group be allowed to cross to the left bank of the Dnieper in the Kremenchug region? This crossing lasted long enough (even during the day) and no measures were taken to liquidate the Kremenchug bridgehead ... It was from this bridgehead that Kleist began to advance towards the Guderian tank group advancing from the north. Connecting Kleist and Guderian and closed the ring around the South-West Front troops in district of Lokhvitsy, Romny in mid-September.
        And at the disposal of Kirponos was a serious group of over 600 thousand people. which got into the Kiev boiler ...
        Kirponos made the most serious mistake that a military leader can make - a loss of control as a result of which formations and units were mixed up and no one really led their retreat - this led to the tragedy ...
        Even Kirponos didn’t leave the encirclement with the bulk of the troops, but with a group of headquarters staff and guards who didn’t take measures to organize a breakthrough, he had more than enough troops at his disposal and the encirclement was not so strong (Baghramyan was able to go through him), and the Germans had already suffered serious losses by this time ..
        And how can one then say that Kirponos’s guilt in the defeat of the South-West Front troops in September is not and to blame everything on Moscow?
        1. alicante11 19 October 2015 11: 07 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          But let me disagree with this - how could the Kleist group be allowed to cross to the left bank of the Dnieper in the Kremenchug region?


          Well, the condition of the front units was deplorable, divisions were cut into sections on the basis of their regular strength, while their combat strength was reduced to several battalions. As a result, it was very difficult to stay even on the river. At the same time, the bridgehead was already in the north, to which all reserves were thrown. Well, Guderian’s exit to the rear of the SWF still meant a disaster.

          And at the disposal of Kirponos was a serious group of over 600 thousand people. which got into the Kiev boiler ...


          There is an opinion, especially if you look at the state of the field army forces, that these were mainly the rear units of the armies (front lines were withdrawn). You also need to consider almost a hundred thousand mobilized, who were stuck in Kiev, without even getting a weapon. The warheads themselves were very small in numbers.

          Even Kirponos didn’t leave the encirclement with the bulk of the troops, but with a group of headquarters staff and guards who didn’t take measures to organize a breakthrough, he had more than enough troops at his disposal and the encirclement was not so strong (Baghramyan was able to go through him), and the Germans had already suffered serious losses by this time ..


          Perhaps this was a mistake, but at the same time, most divisions of the Kiev URA got out of the circle. But the same Baghramyan left with a detachment, which was moved as a deceitful maneuver to ensure the exit of the front headquarters.

          And how can one then say that Kirponos’s guilt in the defeat of the South-West Front troops in September is not and to blame everything on Moscow?


          I am only talking about the fact that the time of departure was lost and why it was done.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. creak 19 October 2015 12: 10 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: alicante11
            At the same time, the bridgehead was already in the north, to which all reserves were thrown.


            In the north, it was not the Southwest Front, but the Bryansk Front under the command of Eremenko who fought against Guderian’s tank group breakthrough, which promised Stalin “Temporarily defeat Guderian’s scoundrel” - the truth turned out exactly the opposite ...

            And if the majority of divisions from the Kiev UR, located on the right bank of the Dnieper, left the encirclement, then why the troops on the Left Bank didn’t leave it? east?
            And the Kremenchug bridgehead on time was not liquidated, not because there was no strength (they were enough), but because they were unable to unravel the plan of the German command in time and assess what danger it poses ...
            And to summarize, it is indisputable that Kirponos could not bear the burden ... But as they say, the dead have no shame, he paid for his mistakes with life.
            Thank you for the exchange of views.
  • Hey
    Hey 18 October 2015 08: 56 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The correctness of the author of the article is confirmed by such a vivid example, albeit from a feature film about General Gorbatov. When he was forced to take the village forehead. And a conversation at a military council when he asked how many guns and shells were needed to crush the enemy’s defenses. Where directly, to the higher authorities, he speaks of their ignorance and gives specific figures.
    Simply, in other matters, as always, as long as there is no war, at the top is the dominance of parquet generals and toads, far from pressing army problems.
    War clears this husk, but it takes time. And from here irreparable losses.
    1. Good me 18 October 2015 10: 26 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: MUD
      The correctness of the author of the article is confirmed by such a vivid example, albeit from a feature film about General Gorbatov.


      You are still "Inglourious at **** Coves", give as confirmation of something there ...
      1. Awaz 18 October 2015 11: 17 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        General Gorbatov is a real officer and a film about him is based on real facts. This was one of many (and) real combat officers, on the hump of which they pulled in that war. Because of his not simple and direct nature, he and other officers similar to him had many problems, but in any case, they honestly performed their duty despite the fact that they put so-called “parquet” wheels in their wheels. By the way, the story about what he refused to take forehead has some details. The renowned Rokossovsky made him do this.
        You should not forget that the catch phrase "Hunchback's grave will correct" is just about him, expressed by Stalin. Stalin treated Gorbatov very well and this can be found in historical chronicles.
        1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 12: 11 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: AwaZ
          Do not forget that the catch phrase "Hunchback's grave will fix" is just about him

          I learn a lot of new things at VO ... So, in 1898, Anton Palych Chekhov had in mind him, using this idiom ????
        2. creak 18 October 2015 15: 29 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: AwaZ
          General Gorbatov is a real officer and a film about him is based on real facts. This was one of many (and) real combat officers, on the hump of which they pulled in that war.


          My late father, a career soldier, fought in the 3rd Army, commanded by Gorbatov. And he and his colleagues considered Gorbatov the best commander of the Second World War, who was very protective of his soldiers and enjoyed their unconditional respect ...
          By the way, an interesting moment - General Gorbatov did not drink or smoke ...
  • alicante11 18 October 2015 08: 56 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    I also want to argue with the author at some points.

    With the role of cavalry, all the leading European countries decided in the middle of the First World War. After that war, the cavalry in the European armies actually died.


    Well, Belov and Dovator were not aware that the cavalry sucks and they forgot to tell their opponents about it. As well as German tank generals, who stomped under Mokra for two days at the beginning of the Polish campaign, by the way, also against the cavalry brigade. It was just that cavalry needed to be used correctly. As an ersatz-motorized infantry, the cavalry operated quite at the level of the year until 43, until the normal mechanization of the infantry began in large numbers.

    As a result, at the beginning of the war, most of the landing corps of the Red Army fought as light infantry units, that is, practically without artillery, mortars, etc. Upstairs, it was obviously decided that brave soldiers did not need heavy weapons.


    Indeed, light and highly trained infantry fought quite well. For example, during the counterattacks of the 5 Army, when its interaction with the army artillery was established. But when the Airborne Forces were put on the defensive, then the absence of heavy weapons seriously made itself felt. Like cavalry, the Airborne Forces should have been used wisely.

    Miscalculated. German troops took the bridges across the Western Dvina from Jekabpils and Dvinsk (Daugavpils) on the move. But in the Baltic military district on the eve of the war there were 26 divisions.


    And how many divisions were in GA "Sever"? And we needed the bridges ourselves to advance the mechanized parts for counterattack.

    In the Kiev Military District, the direction from the border protrusion in the Ustyluh-Sokal area, that is, the shortest direction to Kiev, was covered by relatively weak forces of the Red Army. It is not surprising that the Germans here struck the main blow, tearing the front into two parts. I wonder where the Red Army expected the brunt of the Germans? Through the Carpathians or through the marshes of the Pripyat River?


    For the author, the Red Army adopted the doctrine of maneuver warfare. And instead of substituting infantry units that are weaker in any case, to stop this fist, this fist was supposed to be stopped by counterattacks by our mechanized troops.
  • Nyrobsky 18 October 2015 09: 37 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    It is written floridly with a claim to originality and fits perfectly into the liberals' policy of de-Stalinization and de-communization ....
    What again should someone repent?
    MINUS.
    1. Petrof 18 October 2015 09: 56 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Nyrobsky
      What again should someone repent?


      Our government had many mistakes, we had moments of desperate situation in 1941 - 42, when our army retreated, left our native villages and cities of Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, the Leningrad Region, the Karelian-Finnish Republic, left because there weren’t another way out. Some other people could say: you did not live up to our hopes, we will set up another government that will conclude peace with Germany and provide us with peace. This could happen, keep in mind.

      But the Russian people did not agree to this, the Russian people did not compromise, they showed unlimited trust in our government. I repeat, we had mistakes, the first two years our army was forced to retreat, it turned out that we did not master the events, did not cope with the situation. However, the Russian people believed, endured, waited and hoped that we would cope with events.

      It is for this trust in our government that the Russian people have shown us, thank you very much! (c) Stalin
      1. Captain nemo 18 October 2015 17: 49 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Petrof
        Some other people could say: you did not live up to our hopes, we will set up another government that will conclude peace with Germany and provide us with peace. This could happen, keep in mind.

        Well, no, it was the Russian people during World War I in 1 who were "tired of fighting" with the Germans who set themselves the "new government" from the beginning of Kerensky, and then Leninsky, which included Stalin, who concluded the Brest Peace with Germany. And then Riga. And it was all the Russian people, and no other. And defirambs to sing about the fact that this did not happen in the 1917nd World War I would have Russian people after what had already happened did not.
        And people like Stalin will always praise those who followed the Leninist path and “did not betray” them in difficult times for them. While Stalin himself, in 1917, did this with his party comrades, easily and simply.
        I understand that it is bitter and not pleasant to read such words. But only in such an interpretation of the fait accompli by me, do I see a causal connection between what was happening at that time.
  • Petrof 18 October 2015 09: 52 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    The Military Council of the Baltic Special Military District signed a directive to the troops to put them on combat alert at 2 a.m., and it was sent to the army headquarters by telegraph only at four o'clock in the morning. The troops were ordered: “I. During the night on 25 g ........ Antitank mines and subtle obstacles to put immediately (s)

    and what didn’t they put before? because it’s like preparing for defense
    and how much can one catch in the confusion, in the middle of the night, for less than two hours before the start of the war
  • provincial 18 October 2015 10: 03 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The author is afraid of a repetition of that period, and therefore writes like this. There is common sense in the article, if you carefully and thoughtfully read it.
  • Old warrant officer 18 October 2015 10: 22 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Tanks had a resource of only a few hundred kilometers or 100-150 hours, and they were forced to make marches of 150-200 km along the front.
  • rotmistr60 18 October 2015 11: 16 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    In any case, if you didn’t do the military leadership of many inexplicable pre-war mistakes, the Red Army, perhaps, could stop the enemy on the Western Dvina-Dnieper line by the winter of 1941.

    Here it is. And where were you then (Author Igor Perov)? With your analysis of events, it turns out that the USSR could have won earlier ?. But another question interests me - where do you get so smart from? Not otherwise with the HSE.
    1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 12: 29 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: rotmistr60
      Here it is.

      Well, yes, now it sounds fantastic, taking into account the subjunctive mood and our common Soviet mentality with immersion in tragedy, sacrifice, heroization, and so on. And I agree with the author here - we could.
      1. alicante11 18 October 2015 13: 54 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        And I agree with the author here - they could.


        Could. Fashi were objectively better in all respects. There was only one chance - to turn the war into a protracted one and see who ran out of steam ahead. We succeeded and the Fashis ran out of steam first.
        1. Petrof 18 October 2015 14: 02 New
          • -3
          • 0
          -3
          Quote: alicante11
          There was one chance


          or maybe it would be worth mine the borders of millions of mines
          pull troops directly from the border, airfields were clogged with planes, and without any disguise — although dispersal orders and disguises were repeatedly issued, they were scored — and all this was destroyed by the very first blows

          then maybe there wouldn’t be a war
          1. alicante11 19 October 2015 05: 08 New
            • -1
            • 0
            -1
            or maybe it would be worth mine the borders of millions of mines


            Have you heard anything about mine clearance?

            draw troops directly from the border


            Well, actually, this was done, for example, in KOVO. Where the main blow of the Nazis was supposed. But the ZVO was to launch a counterattack in order to pull the German divisions from the south and ease the position of the South-Western Front, so the troops were on the border. What is in Brest, what is in the Bialystok ledge.

            airfields were jammed with airplanes, and without any disguise -


            I'm already tired of talking here about the reasons for the location of aviation at major airfields. Our communications were not so developed as to operate aviation at alternate aerodromes. And there weren’t so many of them, because there was a transition to concrete airfields from earthen. And they did not have time to build them stupidly.
            Question HOW to disguise aircraft at the airport?

            and all this was destroyed by the first blows


            Do not talk garbage, dear. Aviation in the ZVO (ZF) was destroyed during the air operations of 22-24 in June due to the superiority of fascists in this direction. They had 2 air fleets in the GA Center. At the same time, the aviation of the same SWF operated quite successfully and no one bombed it at airfields.
    2. Captain nemo 18 October 2015 18: 23 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      Quote: rotmistr60
      Here it is. And where were you then (Author Igor Perov)?

      Physically in the 40s, he was here and only his molecules and atoms were scattered throughout the planet in water, air and land. But the moment came when his molecules and atoms gathered in the DNA of his father and mother, and only after that there was Igor Petrov, who did not choose and could not choose the time of his birth, like every one of us living or previously dead. Igor Petrov during his life can move in space on this planet, but he cannot physically move himself in time. But this does not deprive him of the right to name the deceased neighbor, a flayer from the 20s, to call him a flayer, although he never in his life disjointed because the flayer died before his birth.
      1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 18: 49 New
        • -3
        • 0
        -3
        Quote: Captain Nemo
        Physically in the 40s, he was here and only his molecules and atoms were scattered throughout the planet in water, air and land.

        God, what kind of nonsense ??? IN
        Quote: Captain Nemo
        land

        ??? In dumplings and dry rations of the Trinidad army ????
        1. Captain nemo 18 October 2015 19: 18 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Das Boot
          God, what kind of nonsense ???
          In sushi ???
          In dumplings and dry rations of the Trinidad army ????

          Do not pretend to be, you know that it’s not about your overseas cuisine here, but that part of the land that is not filled with water. Type calcium, magnesium, potassium, other minerals, metals, and more.
          Quantum mechanics can help you, I hope. Well, if you just did not arise from the "Holy Spirit" then, then here I take off my hat to you.
          1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 19: 59 New
            • -1
            • 0
            -1
            Quote: Captain Nemo
            then, yes here I take off my hat to you.

            Yes, even remove the scalp, but first re-read your comment from this place:
            Quote: Captain Nemo
            Physically in the 40s, he was here and was only

            easier to remove ...
            1. Captain nemo 18 October 2015 20: 51 New
              • -2
              • 0
              -2
              Does it really bother you to use the word "here" to understand the surface of this planet where there is both inanimate and living nature, is it its minimum and maximum size?
              After all, I did not mean the site of Topwar or the territory of the USSR in the 40s. Well, if only the grammar between the words "was, only", I should put a comma, well this is an unimportant formality and nothing more.
            2. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  • Erg
    Erg 18 October 2015 11: 47 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    I don’t know how it is with tanks, but the author is at odds with history. Hence the terms such as "inexplicable."
  • Altona 18 October 2015 12: 38 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    The USSR was called Russia, which at the time was at least incorrect, did not read further ...
    1. Alexl 18 October 2015 14: 06 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      USSR it was Russia.
      1. Altona 18 October 2015 15: 24 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: AleksL
        USSR it was Russia.

        ------------------
        No, the USSR was the USSR-Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, it was he who waged the war with Germany, there was no need to juggle his miserable minuses ... It was legally that way, modern Russia is the successor of the USSR, and not vice versa ... If you have I mean the Russian empire, then it didn’t die at the end of World War ... And we need to write about the USSR, and not about Russia, referring to the Second World War ...
    2. Captain nemo 18 October 2015 18: 35 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Altona
      The USSR was called Russia, which at that time was at least incorrect

      Inside the USSR, the grammar of the Russian language is likely to be incorrect. However, in the West during the entire existence of the USSR, it was almost always called Russia. The Germans in the GDR called all the soldiers "Russian", despite the fact that half of the soldiers in the 80s in the GSVG had clearly Asian features that were very different from those of the European part of the USSR, and they were not considered and were not Russian in the units of the GSVG.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  • Black cat 18 October 2015 12: 44 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A lot of extra comments in the article. For example, the same T-28s were quite effective, with reasonable use, at least despite the deterioration, they were more reliable than the T-34. The 76mm cannon on the BT is tin, the problem was not the guns, but the shells, so the 45mm cannon completely penetrated any German tank armor in the 41st. To be honest, I did not understand about the mechdivisions. So formed after the arrival of G.K. Zhukov in a large number of mechanized corps, this really was a disaster. The trouble is, not because the tanks were different, the Germans were different, too, and in principle there were enough tanks, for reference, the USSR built more tanks than the whole world combined, but because there were no crews, technical support, and perhaps most importantly trained motorized rifle compounds. I will not continue further, but the author’s idea as a whole is correct.
    1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 13: 02 New
      • -3
      • 0
      -3
      Key phrase:
      Quote: Black cat
      when used wisely
  • bairat 18 October 2015 13: 15 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: faridg7
    Yes, at least modernize with the mosin, and it will not be possible to create the necessary density of fire in defense, and even more so in the offensive, with its help, therefore, the author is right about the outdated samples for that period.

    By the way, Mosinka took to the stage when forming new divisions, and before that she lay in warehouses waiting for re-melting. The army at the outbreak of the war was armed with much more effective weapons, self-loading SKS and SVT carbines, which the Germans enjoyed using.
    1. Petrof 18 October 2015 13: 35 New
      • -5
      • 0
      -5
      Quote: bairat
      SKS self-loading carbines


      Adopted in 1949

      and for mass use of SVT education was not enough
      there are reports that officers cannot master the TT pistol — there is no relevant experience, military skill, and there is simply no knowledge.
      1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 13: 55 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Petrof
        there are reports that officers cannot master the TT pistol — there is no relevant experience, military skill, and there is simply no knowledge.

        link please.
        1. Petrof 18 October 2015 14: 07 New
          • -3
          • 0
          -3
          I read for a long time, I don’t remember exactly where
          it was about the pre-war period, that is, before the Second World War and about army officers who had just graduated from the school.

          but I remember the memories of the pilot (Shmelev "From Low Heights") where he says that all the pilots of his regiment (or whatever he was called there) did not know how to use the compass and map in flight, and in order to find out where they were actually located, they had to sit down and question the locals residents.
          1. bober1982 24 November 2015 23: 00 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Lord, what a foolish thing to say, Petrof- well, everywhere, and everywhere, and about compasses, because oh-oh!
            not too lazy, looked at the comments, laudable of course, but there is no need to talk about the pilot Shmelev, and about the locals, etc.
      2. bairat 18 October 2015 16: 05 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Yeah, wrong, ABC 36.
  • Alexl 18 October 2015 14: 04 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    For some reason, all the bumps are reset to the military command, but it is forgotten that the military command (i.e., the NPO and the General Staff) did not work in isolation from the country's top political leadership - Stalin, the Politburo and the Council of People's Commissars.
  • NordUral 18 October 2015 16: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It seems very much that there was everything - both inability and betrayal. Therefore, the bitter 41. They cleared out the traitors and learned to fight already in the course of the war. And many thanks to them, the heroes of the battles and the workers of the rear!
    1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 18: 55 New
      • -2
      • 0
      -2
      Quote: NordUral
      They cleared the traitors and learned to fight already during the war

      about "cleared the traitors during the war" in more detail, please. Just curious. The thesis that they learned to fight during the war is not new and no doubt. So, in fact, it was always - we did not come to any war prepared. Actually, this is not a reason for joy, IMHO.
  • w3554152 18 October 2015 17: 52 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Tell me, uncle ... Yu.M. Lermontov
    The author, like Goebbels' hidden grandson, coached the facts in the form of gossip, mixed them, and arguments below the belt. And what did he want to play in his school essay? In the end, everything came down to Stalin's guilt. He shot at Stalin, but shot at Russia. For me today, the attitude towards Stalin is a criterion of mind and honesty: an anti-Stalinist is either illiterate or a scoundrel. There is no third. But if everything is clear with the scoundrels rushing to Stalin to get to Russia, then you can’t say much about the phenomenon of illiterate fools in the narrow space of the forum. Minus definitely
    1. Das Boot 18 October 2015 18: 39 New
      • -2
      • 0
      -2
      Quote: w3554152
      Author as Goebbels' hidden grandson

      what a powerful image ... "The illegitimate son of the fifth column. All."
      Quote: w3554152
      For me today - attitude to Stalin is a criterion of mind and honesty: an anti-Stalinist is either illiterate or a scoundrel.

      nda ... Reductio ad Stalinum ... Maybe you personally don’t
      Quote: w3554152
      scoundrel
      But
      Quote: w3554152
      illiterate
      - for sure. I agree with one in the match:
      Quote: w3554152
      you can’t say much about the phenomenon of illiterate fools in a narrow forum space
      Yes, in fact, it is not required - they speak for themselves.
      1. skeptic31 18 October 2015 23: 38 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Writing correctly, of course, is necessary, but to use this as some kind of argument ... it's you for nothing.
        “Great education. Knows four languages. Writes poems. Absolute nerd. ” The phrase, which was so diligently extorted and extinct by foreign language experts, is “philologists” from Shakespeare’s comedy “Twelfth Night.” It is understandable, otherwise they will have nothing to rely on in their claims to their omniscience.
      2. skeptic31 18 October 2015 23: 40 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Writing correctly, of course, is necessary, but to use this as some kind of argument ... it's you for nothing.
        “Great education. Knows four languages. Writes poems. Absolute nerd. ” The phrase, which was so diligently extorted and extinct by foreign language experts, is “philologists” from Shakespeare’s comedy “Twelfth Night.” It is understandable, otherwise they will have nothing to rely on in their claims to their omniscience.
      3. ASK505 19 October 2015 12: 07 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Das Boot
        Reductio ad Stalinum ... Maybe you personally don’t


        Another refined polyglot boatman with a claim to originality. According to the dictionaries they won’t run around here. Then for whom are these foreign letters: Reductio ad? Just want to pour mud from around the corner of Stalin? Not new. Not, but the second is for sure.
        1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 12: 15 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          But he doesn’t have Marinesco or Lunin in the photo ...
          1. ASK505 19 October 2015 14: 42 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            He clearly wrote in German his nickname - the boat. In the photo fitz.
            1. Scraptor 19 October 2015 14: 46 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              The Germanized Slav is actually ...
  • Turkir 18 October 2015 20: 43 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Better bitter truth than sweet lie is a good principle.
    The author made an analysis that lovers of labeling call criticism (!) So as not to repeat mistakes in the future that people have to pay for.
    From what positions is the analysis made? With patriotic.
    Why blame him?
    -----------
    I am particularly touched by the reproaches to the author, saying that it is easy to write to him, "later", after the events.
    Following their logic, the analyst must write "before" events or not write at all.
    There is a third option - to write only that which is pleasant to listen to and lulls the mind.
    The author wrote about this.
  • Black cat 18 October 2015 22: 34 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Das Boot
    Key phrase:
    Quote: Black cat
    when used wisely

    I’ll specially explain: reasonable use is not to throw tanks in an area inaccessible to their use without infantry, artillery and air support for uncharted enemy defense. So it’s not a unique weapon that can defeat everyone and everything, tank troops should be used in conjunction with all other types of troops. Regarding the same T-28, it is well protected in terms of booking the latest upgrades: forehead up to 80mm, side up to 40mm. The armament is a short-barrel 76mm cannon (on earlier versions 45mm) and 4 7,62mm machine guns. In this case, unlike the "raw" T-34 was more reliable and mastered by the crews in terms of operation. Of the minuses, too large a crew and dimensions can be distinguished. To put it mildly, not bad, no worse than German counterparts, but in some ways better. Now with regards to the T-35, it makes no sense to give a characteristic, since he did not participate in the battles, having won the Germans a trophy, there were 56 of them in total, believe the tank is not to blame for being abandoned to the enemy without a fight.
  • gammipapa 18 October 2015 22: 49 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    And what is the moral of this opus? why did a person write so many beeches? Did the gentlemen screaming not pay the grant to the author, let's condemn communism, it’s the communists who have killed so many people, let's repent. What bastards killed so many people, let's repent. Is this the idea the writer wanted to convey to us ???

    On my own, I’ll say one thing, be that as it may, but the USSR won the war, defeated everyone and the Japs at Khalkhin Gol and the Germans with the whole united Europe, and the Americans showed Kuzkin their mother with their atomic bomb. Glory to such ancestors and respect.
    Everyone crashes, hardships, mistakes, but if the share of glorious deeds is as significant as the Soviet leadership had, then people forgive mistakes and value achievements and this is right. If someone says that this is not so and you need to cut your neck for every wrong step - this is not our person, Russian people are generous and fair.
  • Zomanus 19 October 2015 04: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The man simply painted the jambs in the case when the weapon is not stolen.
    That is, dofiga weapons, but they can’t competently dispose of them.
    Take the first Chechen one ... exactly the same situation.
    We learned to fight in the field, but had to fight in the city.
    Afghan, the first call of our troops. From the memoirs of the participants, too, a bunch of tinsel,
    which I had to get rid of quickly.
    It’s just that the author showed, in my opinion, that in addition to having weapons and fighters,
    one must have appropriate thinking.
    Again, what years are these?
    Try to take the initiative, they can even call the enemy of the people ...
    So you shouldn’t blame the author,
    it is worth making conclusions and not allowing repetition.
  • tasha 19 October 2015 05: 45 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    An article at the yellow press of the 90's. During this time, a large number of articles, books, and comments have been written. Author, read ...
    What else hooked. If the author is really a design engineer, the passages from the category of "not done, not done, not created then ..." are surprising. Everything has its reasons, design and technological ... The author, for the sake of interest, study the materials on 37-mm machines, the history of their creation and production.

    I support the very first comment.
  • iouris 19 October 2015 14: 39 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    That's right. The defeat of the Red Army at the first stage of the war was programmed. Question by whom and why. I believe that Stalin understood that success in the war at its first stage would lead to the fact that the USSR would be left without allies alone against all. Germany cannot win the war without the support of Russia or the United States.
  • RoTTor 19 October 2015 15: 43 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    G.K.Zhukov was just the chief of the General Staff of the Red Army, i.e. he was responsible for these misses and for military intelligence by job ...
    And there are a lot of uncomfortable questions about his service in KOVO.
    But he shaved his head under the people's commissar Tymoshenko