Military Review

Once again about the Prague Spring, Operation Danube and the threat of a big war in Europe in 1968

54



This article is a direct continuation of the previous publication. "Prague Spring" or the military-strategic operation "Danube"? To the new historical assessment of the Czechoslovak events of 1968 and their participants, which caused numerous, in the absolute majority, positive reviews and was already called the “manifesto” of the Danube veterans. [1] Despite the benevolent reception, in private we often had to face the same doubts whether we would dramatize the almost forgotten Czechoslovak events today, exaggerating the threat of a “big war” in Europe in the late 60s. And, ultimately, is the call for a review of the status of participants in this military-strategic operation legitimate. A similar reaction has long been familiar. It is openly visible in responses to the numerous appeals of the Rostov public organization “Danube-68” (and other fraternal veteran organizations) to various authorities with an appeal to finally resolve the issue of the status of operation veterans. Striving for thoroughness, officials in one form or another reproduce the same dogma of liberal historiography: no military operations were conducted, at most, there were separate clashes. And, further, the traditional: the introduction of troops has long been recognized as erroneous, and, in general, it is not worth tedding these pages of such a conflicting past. It is this circumstance that compels us to return again to the historical justification of the relevance and legitimacy of our statement of the problem of the status of veterans of Czechoslovak events, not only arguing, but also conceptualizing the conclusions made earlier, giving the reader the opportunity to judge for himself how great the political stakes were in Czechoslovakia and how justified the decision was. about the entry of troops.

In brief, we recall that in a previous publication, we emphasized that reliance on historical memory not only makes it possible to compensate for the weakness of the source base (much of the basic documents are still classified), but also to draw a number of fundamental conclusions that are in many respects at variance with the still existing dogmas and stereotypes linking the main content of the Czechoslovak events with Operation Danube as a logical response to a frank challenge to the post-war structure of the world. Following the well-known explorer of the operation, V.Suncev, we focused on the fact that the operation prevented the upcoming invasion of NATO troops. [2] Agreeing with the authors who perceive the Prague Spring as the first attempt of the “color revolution” organized from the outside, attention to the fact that although at the start of Operation Danube the ATS troops managed to block the Czechoslovak army, the fighting continued in the format of the so-called “new generation war” with a characteristic desire to achieve military goals non-military bubbled means, with increasing influence on the course and outcome of military operations of their non-combat component (which does not make war more humane). [3]

Of course, such an understanding of the Czechoslovak events differs significantly from the traditions of liberal historiography, stemming from the so-called "ideological" concept of the Cold War as a whole and 1968 as one of its peaks. [4] There is a new way to answer a whole series of fundamental questions related to determining the true nature of the Prague Spring, with the emergence of the idea of ​​“socialism with a human face”, with the reasons for the introduction of troops and the nature of the unfolding events. These questions were asked many times and over the past period they moved from the category of “rather political” to the category of “rather historical”, but did not cease to cause heated debate, determined by the personal civil choice of the authors. [5] At the same time, the reality that is being experienced today makes it possible to solve them from the point of view of the political experience accumulated so far, and thus makes it possible to get substantially closer to the final answers. We proceed from the obvious fact that the military-strategic operation "Danube", in essence, was only a kind of counterattack, caused by the desire to stop the pressure of the "Prague Spring", reliably cover the border and fix the limits, which could not be crossed by opponents in the cold war . As a result of its implementation, it was possible not only to prevent a major war in Europe and a revision of the postwar world order, but also to minimize the consequences of the implementation of the American project of the transatlantic partnership, which assumed the movement of the Old World in the wake of the New and limited European political subjectivity. Today it is obvious that it is necessary to clarify the nature of the opposition that unfolded then. Despite the fact that relations between the two superpowers, the USSR and the USA, which determined the geopolitical situation in the world, became its main axis, it would not be right to reduce all the events of the Cold War to a straightforward confrontation between the two ideologies. More noteworthy is the understanding of the Cold War as a general global form, within which specific events were the result of conflicts of 2 types:
- firstly, the conflict associated with the confrontation of the global, capitalist and communist systems, the USA and the USSR, the West and the East;
- secondly, the conflict associated with the struggle for hegemony on the European continent and in the capitalist system.

This second conflict was formed long before the confrontation of the two systems and was perfectly comprehended by its participants, although they externally acted within the framework of the ideological declarations adopted at that time, but, in essence, far from political primitivism and, in practical politics, go beyond capitalist and communist ideological the limits. It appears that these circumstances also determined the political determination of the Soviet leadership, for whom the geopolitical necessity of bringing troops into Czechoslovakia was of paramount importance, which determined the dominance of the military-political component in the Czechoslovak events of the 1968 year.

Indeed, without recognition of the military strategic operation “Danube” as a central (and not a derivative of the Prague Spring) event, we will not be able to answer the main question - why was it to send troops, if it was only in Brezhnev’s protégé, the “ideological heretic” Alexandra Dubceke (whose independence from the political will of the Kremlin should not be exaggerated). After all, there were a lot of other ways to change the Czechoslovak leadership (which started transformations very similar to Kosygin’s famous reform), right down to that fatal accident that the Duke of Richelieu referred to in the famous novel, arguing about one of those events that change the face of the state. And why was Aleksandr Dubcek removed from power only in April of 69 (and the head of government, Blueberry, in January of 70)? Why did you need to enter into a small Czechoslovakia to half a million soldiers and about five thousand units of armored vehicles? Is it only because, according to modern "clever men", "in the Kremlin they were afraid that" ideological contagion "would spread to the Soviet Union." [6]

In answering this question, it is necessary to take into account the dual nature of Czechoslovak events. On the one hand, these events are a typical result of a bloc confrontation, on the other hand, the beginning of a new era associated with the desire to implement new global geopolitical projects in Europe, which in their main contours have survived to the present and continue their confrontation. The highest peak of the outward manifestation of geopolitical shifts, on the surface of waves of anarchist protests turning against all authorities and traditional commandments, was the so-called "global revolution of the 1968 of the year." However, while the revolutionary protests were a manifestation of spontaneous dissatisfaction with past values, the result of the freedom-loving aspirations of young people, their energy was skillfully accumulated and used to implement a specific version of the Transatlantic Partnership, which provided for the unconditional dominance of the United States. The desire to oppose the American project attracted the attention of far-sighted European politicians, clearly aware of the reality of the threat, to the ideas of "Greater Europe." As a concrete political option, these ideas were tried to be realized by the desperately decisive de Gaulle, who, in 1959, made the famous speech on “Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals” and subsequently turned this slogan into a kind of creed of French politics. Of course, taking into account the existence of the USSR, what was least meant was a formalized political union, it was only supposed to steadily build up economic, political and cultural ties between continental countries in response to the claims of the Anglo-Saxon world for world domination. Despite the fact that initially this project was negatively received by the Soviet leadership, in many respects, as a result of the short-sightedness of N.S. Khrushchev, he could count on certain sympathies in the Soviet Union, which was interested in a stable and economically strong Europe. [7] In addition, in his political practice, he merged with the pragmatic aspirations of the Soviet leadership to establish gas exports to Europe in the context of its economic growth and conquest niche market. This desire was predetermined by the colossal changes of the late 60-beginning of the 70's associated with the end of an era in world energy history - the “era of cheap oil” and the transition of the oil and gas theme from the state-corporate level to the level of world politics.

The formation of large-scale energy exports is a fundamentally new feature of the entire Soviet foreign policy of the second half of the 60s. "Strategically-minded leaders of the USSR oil and gas complex (NK Baibakov, AK Kortunov, B.Ye. Shcherbina, N.S. Patolichev and others) understood that it was short-sighted to use all the oil and gas reserves of the USSR fields for internal needs . True, this theory had opponents, but the idea of ​​organizing the export of oil and gas to Europe won. ” Energy cooperation could become a kind of bridge, thrown over ideological barriers, and contribute to the rapprochement of Western Europe and the Eastern bloc.

At the same time, the movement towards the “Greater Europe” met with fierce resistance from the Americans. The essence of Washington’s policy was to put into practice the theory of conflict management developed by intellectuals in the United States in the same years. As part of this struggle, the Anglo-Saxon world managed to provoke the Red May in France, where trust in the “obstinate general” (not only coping with the situation, but ensuring the victory of his party in the early elections) was artificially (and, alas, skillfully) undermined, and he himself, being harassed by the anti-Gallist press, was soon forced to resign. [8]

For the Soviet Union, the “European unrest” was a direct threat - the development of protest sentiments in Prague could lead to the disruption of the gas project, which had already spent a lot of effort. It became obvious that the same controlled youth energy was used by political opponents for the “battle for Czechoslovakia”, not only occupying a key position in the center of Europe, but also being the territory along which the Brotherhood gas pipeline passed. The fact that this energy was outwardly directed not against capitalism, but against communist dogmatism and socialist bureaucracy, although for the same notorious “freedom”, did not in the least alter the essence of the strike on the country that played a special role in the Soviet energy project. And the aspiration of the Soviet Union in the context of aggravated confrontation with NATO, the embargo on the supply of large-diameter pipes (introduced by the US as part of NATO in 1962 year shortly after the Caribbean crisis) and the appeal of the West German government to large steel companies to cancel contracts concluded about 130 thousand tons of steel pipes) strengthen the position in Central Europe by placing a military contingent in Czechoslovakia. The presence of Soviet troops stabilized the situation and opened up broad opportunities for the quick implementation of the energy project, especially since the construction of extensive gas pipelines and the development of deposits located in remote regions required the concentration of enormous resources from other industries and the well-being of the population. The stake was truly historical, and it is in this sense, in our opinion, that the famous words of L.I. Brezhnev, who declared that if Czechoslovakia had been lost, he would have had to leave his post as secretary general.

It must be borne in mind that in Czechoslovakia itself in the second half of the 60-s, the illusions remained from the pre-war period and inspired the Prague Spring, according to which the country's role was reduced to the “second Switzerland”, acting as a mediator between the liberal West and the socialist East. These illusions suggested the need for an eclectic combination of seemingly incompatible political traits of both systems. The idea of ​​serving as a bridge between the East and the West, which has been cherished by the Czechs, has long since acquired a new sound and has made national pride wicked. The need for the ideological justification of these aspirations has brought about such an amusing ideological construction, as the notorious “socialism with a human face”. Of course, at the same time, all external forces saw the future of Czechoslovakia in a fundamentally different way and assigned him in their geopolitical plans nothing more than the role of a strategic foothold. [9] This was especially evident in connection with the beginning of the concentration of NATO troops on the Czechoslovak border and with the preparations for conducting special operations inside the country. In general, the pre-war situation repeated itself, when Prague, trying to outwit all the great powers, was itself the victim of its own intrigue. The failure of “socialism with a human face” became apparent already in the course of the Prague Spring. All the numerous assurances about control over the political situation in Czechoslovakia and the ultimate loyalty to the ideals of socialism (which should only be “humanized” a little) were no more than a good mine in a bad game. It is quite obvious that the reforms that were carried out became only a cover for the anti-Soviet forces. The fears that, faced with the failure of the very idea of ​​“humanized socialism” and losing the real levers of political power, the leadership of Czechoslovakia would ultimately be forced to “merge” socialism (and with it the union with the USSR) in exchange for any personal guarantees (something like this happened a little bit later when Dubcek and his entourage “merged” those who essentially saved this company without hesitation - the XIX emergency congress of the Communist Party of People’s Congress, which gathered on August 22 in Prague’s Vysočany working district, and decided which threatened the real conflict of the Soviet leadership with the world communist movement). The need for the most rigid control over the development of the situation became inevitable, especially since the immersion of Czechoslovak society, especially the youth, was too deep into the imagination of well-being. And the development of this situation was increasingly bearing the distinct imprint of the national neurosis with all its characteristic features. Soon after the introduction of troops, the crowd of onlookers quickly turned into organized organisms, in which an absolute majority with an unstable psyche, fueled by new leaders pursuing their goals, went against concrete will to provoke concrete actions against the Soviet military, and it was very difficult to stop these actions.

The development of events in Czechoslovakia could easily lead to a big war with the Soviet Union being drawn in, which fully complied with the American strategy of fighting specific variants of “Greater Europe”, inevitably led to a final European split. However, the brilliant planning and implementation of the military-strategic operation "Danube" disrupted these plans. 10 September the 1968 year in Moscow signed an agreement on the supply of natural gas from the USSR to Czechoslovakia and on cooperation during the 1969 year in the construction of a gas pipeline on the territory of the Soviet Union. Despite the external strengthening of anti-Sovietism, cooperation in the energy sphere has become a fait accompli. [10] Over the next two decades, the Soviet Union became a leading producer and exporter of natural gas. “At the end of 1960, Soviet gas came to Czechoslovakia, to 1968 to Austria, to 1972 to 1973 to Germany and Italy, and to 1975 to Hungary. A little later - in France and Finland. It was the beginning of gas supply to almost all of Europe. The main gas flows went through Czechoslovakia to Austria, Germany, Italy. ”[11] At the same time, despite the height of the Cold War, the energy sector of the USSR and Germany began to discuss the gas-pipe deal. [12]

As soon as the outlines of interaction with the leadership of Czechoslovakia were determined and 10 of September 1968 in Moscow signed an agreement on the supply of natural gas from the USSR to Czechoslovakia and on cooperation in 1969, the troops were immediately withdrawn from Prague. [13] It is interesting that after 1968, the relationship with continental Europe has improved so much that we can safely talk about direct continuity with the project of de Gaulle. The initiative, however, has now passed to Germany, and it was the gas-pipe deal that became the forerunner of Willy Brandt's eastern policy. It was followed by a series of historical agreements that changed Europe. In March, Willy Brandt first met with East German Prime Minister Willy Shtof, and later an agreement was signed on the foundations of relations between the Federal Republic of Germany and the GDR. In the same year, treaties were concluded with the USSR and Poland, which provided for the waiver of the use of force and the recognition of existing borders, a four-party agreement on West Berlin. This defused international tensions, culminating in the signing of the Helsinki Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1975. [14]

Over the next two decades, the role of the USSR in the system of international relations was largely based on the success of the military-strategic operation Danube. It was then that the Soviet Union, skillfully taking advantage of the exacerbation of the project confrontation between the United States and continental Europe, not only defended the post-war world structure, but also took the path of creating an “energy empire”, which later determined both its historical fate and the fate of modern Russia. It was a period of relatively favorable development, and it would be absurd to reproach the participants of the Czechoslovak events in the subsequent dependence of the country on gas exports. As it should be in history, a new reality was born in a fierce military-political confrontation, and, we emphasize again, one has only to be surprised at the level of planning and implementation of the “Danube”, which became almost the highest advance of the entire Soviet military art, and at the same time demonstrated the possibility of successful use of the army against today's popular political and military technologies.

On this one could put an end. Moreover, it can be considered in many respects a new redivision of the world, which followed the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the last century. We witnessed the dismantling of the “Yalta” system and the formation of a new - “Maltese” one. But too much makes 1968 of the year relate to modernity. This is not only the desire to discredit those who in the distant 1968 year did not allow a "big war" in Europe, but also a poorly concealed intention to solve all the problems at the expense of Russia, having previously exposed it as an aggressor. This is the mass production of "color" revolutions, the ease with which overseas opponents are ready to go to war in Europe in order to implement their own commercial projects. This is the traditional vagueness of the European position with a characteristic desire to preserve selfish well-being even at the expense of its own future, and Europe's internal weakness, which is unable to defend its own values, and the unenviable perspectives of the Greater Europe project, which may be completely buried by today's geopolitical processes . However, historical alternatives do not disappear without a trace. Even if they did not take place in a certain historical period, they still continue to be preserved in a “deferred” mode and at the new round of historical evolution they are repeated, if not in full, then in their main components.

1 South Russian lawyer. 2014, N 3 (October-November); URL: http://www.advpalataro.ru/publications/index.php?SECTION_ID=406&PHPSESSID=31ed49f931fe147e39d821f1afe2fdf5 (date of access 12.08.2015). After publication in this journal, this article was posted on a number of electronic resources, primarily on the website of V.P. Suntseva "Operation Danube"; URL: http://dunay1968.com/books.html (date of treatment 12.08.2015/70454/12.08.2015), on the popular portal "Military Review" (URL: http://topwar.ru/00-prazhskaya-vesna-ili-voenno-strategicheskaya -operaciya-dunay.html (date of treatment 24/0002419/12.08.2015)), on the website "Historic.Ru: World History", where it was called "a kind of manifesto of the Danube veterans" (URL: http: //historic.ru/news/ item / f12.08.2015 / sXNUMX / nXNUMX / index.shtml (date of access XNUMX), on the official website of the Russian Military Historical Society URL: http: //histrf.ru/ru/lenta-vremeni/event/view/vvod-voisk -stran-varshavskogho-doghovora-v-chiekhoslovakiiu (date of treatment XNUMX) The authors express their sincere gratitude to everyone who did not remain indifferent to the preservation of historical memory and the restoration of historical justice.

2 See Other: Suntsev, VP Operation Danube: As It Was; URL: http://dunay1968.com/article/readbook.html (the date of the appeal 12.08.2015). In an interview with the newspaper "Culture" 16 August 2013, V.P. Suntsov stressed; “If we had not entered Czechoslovakia on the night of 20 on 21 in August of 1968, then in a few hours there would already be troops of the North Atlantic Treaty. In turn, this would not have stopped the Soviet Union, and then the Third World War could have begun. ” (URL: http://dunay1968.com/pdf/culture-2.pdf (the date of the appeal 12.08.2015)).

3 This conclusion is fully supported by the available documents and is fully consistent with the historical memory of the Czechoslovak events. Other see eg. Shevchenko V. Towards Dawn; URL: http://rassvet21-go.ru/index.php/kniga (the date of the appeal 12.08.2015).

4 For more details on the ideological approach, see, for example, M.Y. Davydov. The ideological approach to the origins of the Cold War in modern Western historiography. Bulletin of Tomsk State University; URL: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/ideologicheskiy-podhod-k-istokam-holodnoy-voyny-v-sovremennoy-zapadnoy-istoriografii (the date of the appeal 12.08.2015).

5 It seems that the controversy surrounding the Czechoslovak events only intensifies over time. Once again, the desire to preserve the untenable liberal dogmas and stereotypes by all means was observed in connection with the screening of the documentary film “The Warsaw Pact. Declassified pages ”on the“ Russia 1 ”TV channel (see on: URL: http: //www.bbc.com/russian/international/2015/06/150601_czechs_slovaks_russians_row_over_film (12.08.2015 circulation date)). This time, the discussion not only quickly turned into political squabbles (see, for example: URL: http: //www.bbc.com/english/international/2015/06/150601_czechs_slovaks_russians_row_over_film (12.08.2015 appeal date)), but also accompanied by characteristic nervousness (see: URL: http://echo.msk.ru/programs/vottak/1561766-echo/ (the address of 12.08.2015 treatment)).

6 Mlechin LM Brezhnev; URL: http://www.e-reading.mobi/chapter.php/91018/36/Mlechin_-_Brezhnev.htm (12.08.2015 contact date)

7 Sam de Gaulle did not hide that he pinned high hopes on the Soviet Union. See, for example: How General de Gaulle glorified Russia; URL: http://inosmi.ru/world/20150720/229189212.html (the date of the appeal 12.08.2015).

8 Involuntarily agrees with those modern authors who claim that “Americans are well aware of how to lead the crowd, then whispered there they threw cobble-stones. Some intellectual are advised to raise their voice in defense of students. Students are alluded to by the names of police agents and all of a sudden they are nonprofessionals students decode (what smart they are) ... So, the general was punished and the new technology of inciting revolution was checked "(URL: http://www.contrtv.ru/common/2709/ (the date of the appeal 12.08.2015)).

9 See Other: The Prague Spring and the position of the Western European Communist Parties; URL: http://aleksandr-kommari.narod.ru/1968.htm (the date of the appeal 12.08.2015).

10 “The agreement was prepared from the beginning of 1968 (ie, since the fall of Novotny and the election of Dubcek as the Chairman of the Communist Party - aut.) And it was signed during the crisis period of Czechoslovakia. It has become one of the most important tools for overcoming the crisis and the gradual stabilization of the economic and political situation in Czechoslovakia. The signing took place immediately after the August events (after the military invasion - ed.) 10 September 1968. At the same time, additional Soviet supplies were agreed to, which helped solve the immediate problems of Czechoslovakia with raw materials and food ”(F. Mares (F. Mares)) ( First Deputy Minister of Foreign Trade of Czechoslovakia.) 30 Jahre Handels- und Wirtschaftsbeziehungen UdSSR und CSSR (30 years of trade and economic ties between the USSR and Czechoslovakia). - “Außenhandel” No. XXUMX, 4 g., c. 1975).

11 Selfless labor - the key to overall success ...

12 See other: Pipe to infinity. Chronicle of the largest deal in Russian-German history News N ° 169, November 17, 2000 http://www.vremya.ru/print/3739.html (accessed June 12.06.2015, XNUMX).

13 The key part of the gas component is fully understood by the most astute Czech authors, noting that the Warsaw Pact armies were not included because of the emergence of “socialism with a human face”, but for the sake of control over the territory necessary for the “big deal” being prepared in the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic of Soviet troops, that military control over this country was much more important than political and ideological control. See eg: URL: http://ceskapozice.lidovky.cz/zivy-sen-o-prichodu-sovetskych-vojsk-dw7-/tema.aspx?c=A101130_114847_pozice_378 (the date of the appeal 12.06.2015).

14 Yuri Solozobov. Once again about pipes and gas; URL: ttp: //www.apn.ru/opinions/article9309.htm (the date of the appeal 12.06.2015).

* BBBulgakov –Russian commander, Hero of Russia, Colonel General, Candidate of Military Sciences;
VV Shevchenko - honorary worker of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Major General, participant of the military-strategic operation "Danube"; Chairman of the Rostov public organization of warriors-internationalists "Danube-68";
AVBaylov - Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Sociology,
history, political science of the Institute of Management in the environmental, economic and social systems of the Southern Federal University.
Author:
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Aleksander
    Aleksander 21 November 2015 07: 26
    15
    The entry of troops into Czechoslovakia, the presence of troops in Poland, Hungary and Germany were absolutely correct and logically explicable - the USSR (Russia) secured the eternal path along which invaders invaded us for centuries. Therefore, there was not only war, but also its threats. Today, when, as a result of the betrayal of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, we left there, this danger and Russia's vulnerability have increased many times ....
  2. Patriot C
    Patriot C 21 November 2015 08: 01
    26 th
    As subsequent history showed, the entry of troops into Czechoslovakia was a fatal mistake. The Czechs quite rightly consider what happened in 1968 as a military occupation and now they, as well as Poles, Hungarians, Bulgarians, are consistent opponents of the Russian Federation. Those who justify this mistake, let them imagine that the Chinese entered their army in Moscow to protect their borders. soldier
    1. Homo
      Homo 21 November 2015 08: 17
      11
      Quote: PatriotC
      Those who justify this mistake, let them imagine that the Chinese entered their army in Moscow to protect their borders.

      Bad example. For a long time, troops had to be brought into China so that they would not be crushed. Learn the story.
      Quote: PatriotC
      The Czechs quite rightly consider what happened in 1968 as a military occupation and now they, as well as Poles, Hungarians, Bulgarians ...

      And they do not consider the USSR as liberators from fascism? How many would have remained if not for the USSR! This is in your gratitude for their release?
      1. Walking
        Walking 21 November 2015 09: 58
        10
        The troops were entered correctly, it is a pity they only withdrew in the 90s, the Americans left their troops in Germany.
    2. kashtak
      kashtak 21 November 2015 12: 15
      11
      Quote: PatriotC
      Those who justify this mistake, let them imagine that the Chinese entered their army in Moscow to protect their borders.

      Firstly, Czechoslovakia was part of a large defensive bloc that at that time was waging a Cold War with NATO and organized in response to NATO. remind you of the "local" wars in Indochina, Africa and Latin America? may remind about Pinochet, etc. ?. going over to the side of the enemy during the war exposed and jeopardized the entire defense system of the block. what do you call it? just let's not tell you that Czechoslovakia would have remained a friendly neutral country. We swami know perfectly well where the countries of the former Warsaw Pact are now. secondly, it was a collective decision and not only the Soviet troops, no? why only Russia claims? thirdly, the United States, if Canada wanted to join the Warsaw bloc, would act softer? remember the Cuban missile crisis.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Rastas
      Rastas 21 November 2015 15: 55
      -2
      I also believe that the use of tanks in Czechoslovakia was a mistake. With the suppression of the Hungarian rebellion, there is no question in the 56th, there was a nationalist rebellion of the remaining Salashists and the nomenklaturars who joined them, ours did everything right, despite the modern attempts of the Hungarians to portray the rebels as fighters for democracy. Since the 68th, everything is more complicated, a very strong blow to socialism was dealt, many countries became disappointed in this way precisely after these events. .
    5. 222222
      222222 21 November 2015 23: 43
      0
      ..dropping in troops ... all communications have earned openly ... NATO analysts are fucked up and couldn’t assess the situation ... and the VD troops were already in Prague ..
    6. max702
      max702 21 November 2015 23: 54
      +2
      Quote: PatriotC
      As subsequent history showed, the entry of troops into Czechoslovakia was a fatal mistake. The Czechs quite rightly consider what happened in 1968 as a military occupation and now they, as well as Poles, Hungarians, Bulgarians, are consistent opponents of the Russian Federation. Those who justify this mistake, let them imagine that the Chinese entered their army in Moscow to protect their borders.

      During the Second World War on the territory of Czechoslovakia, 30% of all Wehrmacht weapons and ammunition were manufactured .. AND NOT ONE! A case of sabotage ... That is, out of the 30 million dead of our citizens, 10 million were killed with the help of the Czechoslovak strike work .. 10 million !!!! And then tell me after that we did not call to account this country. yes that there even economically or as sought. but imagine what would happen if similar losses were inflicted by the USA or England with the help of Czechoslovakians? Would they also forgive and forget? Oh well . the Germans are still under occupation and in economic slavery, and this country is sentenced to extinction. So having betrayed the USSR in 68g they got off very easy!
      rs: And the order was brought there by performing the most dirty work of the troops of the GDR, but the Czechs have no complaints against the Germans! For these are old and real masters and they can ...
    7. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 01: 25
      +1
      That you now say at least on behalf of 60% of Czechs, right? )))) A naive Chukchi young man. Or maybe not a young man, but a terry anti-Soviet propagandist, huh?
  3. Evgeniy667b
    Evgeniy667b 21 November 2015 08: 37
    +6
    respected Patriotand what do you mean by occupation. What is the difference between the attitude of the invaders to the inhabitants of the occupied country. If we analyze the behavior of Americans in Europe or Okinawa, then here are vivid examples of the invaders! At that time they felt themselves to be complete masters of the situation and did not stand on ceremony. The Soviet army in the person of the Central Army did not leave places of permanent deployment without coordination with the leadership of Czechoslovakia, and the personnel did not go beyond locations. No one saw the idly walking Soviet military, which cannot be said of the Americans. TGV was the Guarantor of the World and not otherwise.
    Yes, the fence press, say, in Mlada Boleslav, for a very long time shone with the inscription - "Invaders go home", but this is not from a great mind.
  4. Neophyte
    Neophyte 21 November 2015 08: 40
    +7
    And the events in Hungary in 1956.? There was a classic coup of nationalists, and NATO troops were already preparing for the invasion! The introduction of Soviet troops with a sweep of Nazi troops was timely. In general, the history of such events has been little covered in the studies of domestic authors, and has been criticized for a long time from the liberals.
    1. igordok
      igordok 21 November 2015 09: 10
      +6
      Maybe I'm wrong, but I suppose that the current policy of Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia is not so Russophobic in comparison with its neighbors (Poland, Romania) because of the "anti-Maidans" carried out in 1956 and 1968.
      1. kashtak
        kashtak 21 November 2015 12: 30
        +5
        Quote: igordok
        Maybe I'm wrong, but I suppose that the current policy of Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia is not so Russophobic in comparison with its neighbors (Poland, Romania) because of the "anti-Maidans" carried out in 1956 and 1968.

        there is a relationship here or not, but in the Czech Republic the attitude towards Russia is much better than the Russophobes from the CIA wish.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Rastas
        Rastas 21 November 2015 15: 59
        +1
        Hungarians were not very Russian. father traveled to Hungary in the 76th, as he said that they are gloomy in relation to ours. But socialism there was similar to Yugoslav, small enterprises with self-financing were developed, and there was also its own opposition. By the way, the current Hungarians recall the times of Janos Kadar with nostalgia.
        1. Was mammoth
          Was mammoth 21 November 2015 16: 05
          +4
          Quote: Rastas
          Rastas (1) RU Today, 15:59 ↑ New
          Hungarians were not very Russian.

          Well, Duc, it’s enough to remember on whose side the Hungarians fought until 1945. My father got both Balaton in the 45th and Budapest in the 56th.
          1. Rastas
            Rastas 21 November 2015 16: 18
            +2
            My grandfather also stormed Budapest, but in the 45th, he was an artilleryman. But he did not like to tell, only mentioned that there were terrible battles. And in the 56th, one of my acquaintances, a colonel who was already retired, took part there, he worked in our unit in the car service. Also terrible things about the bullying of the Magyars.
            1. Was mammoth
              Was mammoth 21 November 2015 16: 39
              +2
              Quote: Rastas
              My grandfather also stormed Budapest, but in the 45th

              No wonder there is a medal "For Budapest".
              Father also did not like to talk about the war.
              In 56, they entered Budapest twice, the first time they were forbidden to shoot. They entered "humanely". There were heavy losses. The second time they entered "with music".
  5. venaya
    venaya 21 November 2015 08: 49
    +3
    The Czechoslovak events of 1968, this is the second post-war Sabbath organized by Western special services, a blow to the independence of the social. countries. The first, apart from the events in post-war Berlin, took place in 1956, which is still very poorly described. The reason perhaps lies in the fact that the events of 1956 were probably artificially created by the future head of the KGB Andropov, who was the USSR ambassador to Hungary in those years, and which is described in detail in the book of a member of the CPSU Central Committee called Yuri Andropov. What happened in Prague still requires careful study from all sides, we need this now and will need it in the future. The author's article reveals a little unknown events of that time, thanks to the author for this article.
    1. slovak
      slovak 21 November 2015 17: 01
      -1
      Please, could you name the author of this book?
    2. alexej123
      alexej123 12 October 2016 09: 47
      0
      "Probably". And the memories of the "former" are not the sources of Truth and Truth. Facts - transcripts of meetings, sht, etc. - these are the facts on which conclusions can be made. Plus, the control system in the party, in the authorities, especially in the embassies abroad, would not allow ONE person to arrange this.
  6. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 21 November 2015 09: 28
    +4
    Quote: Homo
    Quote: PatriotC
    Those who justify this mistake, let them imagine that the Chinese entered their army in Moscow to protect their borders.

    Bad example. For a long time, troops had to be brought into China so that they would not be crushed. Learn the story.
    Quote: PatriotC
    The Czechs quite rightly consider what happened in 1968 as a military occupation and now they, as well as Poles, Hungarians, Bulgarians ...

    And they do not consider the USSR as liberators from fascism? How many would have remained if not for the USSR! This is in your gratitude for their release?

    Dear, Hungarians and Bulgarians during the Second World War fought on the side of Germany.
  7. Was mammoth
    Was mammoth 21 November 2015 09: 32
    +6
    The introduction of troops into Czechoslovakia is a mistake.
    The introduction of troops in Hungary is a mistake
    The introduction of troops into Afghanistan is a mistake.
    But in Poland, not a mistake.
    There was a confrontation between systems and the use of military force was a necessity, not a whim and a mistake. Is the presence of American troops in these countries not a mistake?
    Or maybe the attacks of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria are also a mistake? It is enough to look at the political views, which claim that these are mistakes, to understand who benefits from it.
  8. oracul
    oracul 21 November 2015 09: 51
    +6
    Actually, it is not so strange to read the commentary of Patriot S. People with a "special" opinion were, are and will be. The supporters of Gorbachev, who created chaos and destroyed the great power, are still cutting through. Yes, and Judas Trotsky, until now, is not alone with his ideas of a permanent world revolution, and Khrushchev, who presented a "thaw" and the possibility of revenge to those who suffered from repression and their descendants. True, it was not the masses who were concerned with revenge, but, first of all, those who staked on the world revolution, on the preservation of their loved ones in power, who tasted the sweetness of commanding others and not being held responsible for what they had done. It was they who became the basis for the growth of capitalism, it was they and their descendants who played the role of victims of the regime and tried to get the most out of life. And Czechoslovakia, unlike Hungary, where the emphasis was on the force option, was only a touchstone in the organization of color revolutions, the result of which we see today (Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Ukraine, etc.). To paraphrase the song: "A bloody trail spreads over the great Earth." And the most interesting thing is that none of the liberoids and their supporters consider themselves responsible for the blood and misfortunes of millions of people.
  9. parusnik
    parusnik 21 November 2015 10: 16
    +7
    By introducing troops into Czechoslovakia, the USSR postponed the collapse of the CMEA, the Warsaw Pact, as well as the entry of Eastern European states into NATO for a good 20 plus years .. And similar: Ah, forgive us the Czechs for the occupation! .. This is in the ranks of Akhedzhakova and others with her..
  10. apro
    apro 21 November 2015 11: 04
    +2
    The thoughtless or wrecking withdrawal of troops from Austria by the grosser is a harbinger of the orange revolutions in Hungary and Czechoslovakia, as soon as the USSR gave the slack sga immediately took advantage of this.
  11. Weaving
    Weaving 21 November 2015 11: 05
    +3
    The deployment of troops in this case was absolutely justified, as history shows, the enemy is not asleep. I believe that this concept needs to be fixed at the state level.
  12. fzr1000
    fzr1000 21 November 2015 12: 26
    -5
    Germans were the most frostbitten in Prague. They really shot a lot of people. Ours almost went into battle with parts of the GDR because of this.
    1. U-96
      U-96 21 November 2015 12: 45
      +3
      Quote: fzr1000
      Germans were the most frostbitten in Prague. They really shot a lot of people. Ours almost went into battle with parts of the GDR because of this.

      As far as I remember, the last time the Germans were in Prague was in May 1945. In 1968, they could not shoot anyone due to their absence on the territory of Czechoslovakia. It is a pity if the branch is replenished with nonsense like "... drew a circle, sat on a chair in the middle and shot at anyone who crossed the line ..."
      1. fzr1000
        fzr1000 21 November 2015 13: 07
        +3
        Remember badly. Or you just don’t know. And it’s foolish to categorically declare to your opponent that he is writing nonsense. Even just stupid.
        1. U-96
          U-96 21 November 2015 13: 24
          0
          Quote: fzr1000
          Remember badly. Or you just don’t know.

          please proofs.
          1. fzr1000
            fzr1000 21 November 2015 13: 42
            +5
            Only out of love for art and truth. Not only did the GDR send troops there.

            http://www.istpravda.ru/research/4911/

            Valery Lunev (in 1968 - guards. Ml. Sergeant, gunner of the 31st Guards separate tank battalion, 27th guards. MSD):

            On the night of August 21 we were raised by alarm, ordered to uncover the guns, remove from the transport lock, and we went on the march. We were told that we must help, together with other fraternal countries, the Czechoslovak people and the people's army to defend the gains of socialism and prevent the arrival of Americans. And although it was announced to us that the Czechoslovak army would not resist, we had full ammunition if the forces of counter-revolution and international reaction undertake provocations. The battalion commander ordered (and he was a participant in the Great Patriotic War) to respond to fire with fire. When they approached the border, the barrier was raised, and no one showed us any resistance. Part of the tanks of our battalion were thrown to block Czechoslovak military units. And part, including mine, continued to march ... Two days later, part of our battalion lined up in a battle line near Karlovy Vary, lowering the guns down, mothballed cumulative and armor-piercing shells and began to wait. Talkies were heard from the radio, from which it became clear that parts of the Czechoslovak tank regiment wanted to break through to the border with the Federal Republic of Germany, and we would be their first barrier. Everyone was waiting for the battle, but with the help of aviation the tanks were turned to the old location and disarmed there. The battle did not take place.

            The Czechs themselves almost did not offer active armed resistance, but they often lined up across the road in a huge crowd, blocked the movement of equipment, threw all sorts of rubbish at us, and shouted various curses. However, as soon as someone gape, he was immediately attacked from around the corner. There was a case when a huge crowd of children blocked the way of our column, shouting: "Fascists! Invaders - go home! Dubchek - YES! Brezhnev - NEVER!"

            From the first days the roads were littered with leaflets with anti-Soviet statements, all fences and roads were covered with provocative slogans. And it was especially annoying that it was worth working on the air for a few minutes, as you already hear: "Invaders - go home!" We were amazed that we would only switch to the spare, and they were already on it ... Although I personally don’t remember a case when a Soviet soldier did something bad to the Czechs. Here next to us stood the Germans, who walked "almost with their sleeves rolled up" ... At first, someone tried to organize something like a barricade of cars on their way. But the Germans were not at a loss and simply ran over them with tanks, without even turning around. And in general, where they saw a sidelong glance, they just got into a fight. Yes, and the Poles also did not give descent. I don't know about the others. But the Czechs did not throw anything at them, let alone shoot, they were afraid ...

            Although I do not know about this from the Internet.
            1. U-96
              U-96 21 November 2015 13: 58
              -3
              Quote: fzr1000
              Valery Lunev (in 1968 - guards. Ml. Sergeant, gunner of the 31st Guards separate tank battalion, 27th guards. MSD):

              Do not tell, for God's sake.
              Quote: fzr1000
              Not only did the GDR send troops there.
              I repeat the request:
              Quote: U-96
              please proofs.
              participation of the army of the GDR. The rest are not interested.
              Only, please - without the descriptions of "combat episodes" from "eyewitnesses" and "participants" that have been worn down on LiveJournal, with colorful details about the coolness of the Germans and rolled up sleeves. I think you meant this when you wrote
              Quote: fzr1000
              Germans were the most frostbitten in Prague.
              ? Is there evidence of the level of the Bundesarchive or the archives of the NNA GDR?
              1. fzr1000
                fzr1000 21 November 2015 14: 03
                +2
                I am familiar with an eyewitness of these events. People are still alive, imagine, so bear with it a little more. Then there will be a rewrite of the past.

                Do you have a clearance of this level? To the Bundesarchive? Then refute my information by excerpts from there.
                Really not funny. That cuckoo.

                And stick the cons to yourself, experts. "It is necessary to kill such experts" O. Bender.
                1. fzr1000
                  fzr1000 21 November 2015 14: 10
                  +1
                  Ivan Kirillov (in 1968 - a private individual regiment of communications):

                  - On the first day of the entry of the Commonwealth troops into Czechoslovakia, there was turmoil: convoys of roads blocked roads, some jet planes flew from above at an extremely low altitude, and glass burst in the windows of houses, pouring loose beads shining in the sun down, under whose feet local residents stood - then anti-aircraft mounts and soldiers turned them, not knowing whether to shoot or not. Whose they were incomprehensible ... It was poorly visible - far away.

                  On the streets of a crowd of people, it was hard to drive through. We drove to the center of Bratislava in order to muffle the radio stations broadcasting them near the house. What we did back from the territory of Hungary. And there, Marshal Vasilevsky with his retinue flew to us in Hungary by helicopter (first saw). We built the entire regiment just before the entrance to Czechoslovakia in front of the border, and he says:

                  - Comrade soldiers, you have the highest honor to defend the ideals of socialist construction in the neighboring state of Czechoslovakia. Our fathers and grandfathers freed the Slavic brothers from fascism, and now the machinations of the imperialists and their accomplices of the nationalists want to make a coup there. This we will not allow! With honor and dignity, carry out your military duties, and look - the enemy does not sleep! You are all with weapons, but use weapons only to the extent necessary to protect civilians, objects taken under guard, equipment entrusted to you, your commanders and yourself! Additionally, commanders in Czechoslovakia will inform you about the use of weapons.

                  On the road and in Bratislava itself, indecent hand gestures and probably insults rained down from everyone from everywhere on us. Yes, even today the tankers, near whom we drove by, talked about the fact that a Molotov cocktail had got into their tank. It is good that the bottle fell on the side of the tank, and not on the transmission, where the engine compartment is located, otherwise they would have burned. And we think why one tank at the crossroads is all smoked.

                  At first, they were not allowed to shoot, but they allowed us after decisive action by the soldiers of the NNA - the National People's Army from the GDR. And the Polish Army also firmly acted against the provocateurs. It may be rude, but it was impossible to act differently.

                  This man is also lying, but U-96, he knows the whole truth-mother. He is the ultimate truth. simply.
                  1. U-96
                    U-96 21 November 2015 14: 38
                    -1
                    Quote: fzr1000
                    but U-96, he then knows the whole truth, his mother. He is the ultimate truth. simply.

                    I do not pretend, unlike you, but prefer to use documents, rather than market writing, to which, as I see, you are trying to painful weakness.
                2. U-96
                  U-96 21 November 2015 14: 37
                  +1
                  Quote: fzr1000
                  Do you have a clearance of this level? To the Bundesarchive? Then refute my information by excerpts from there.

                  And you are really funny and uninteresting interlocutor. Judging by the level of your sources .. hmm .. "knowledge" - you do not speak German and it is not worth offering you to read Rüdiger Wenzke. Although there may be a Russian translation, I don’t know.
                  As for BA ... Imagine - there is tolerance laughing Here is a link to the originals of archival documents with an explanatory article by Suzanne Maine: http: //www.bundesarchiv.de/oeffentlichkeitsarbeit/bilder_dokument
                  e / 01095 / index-10.html.de
                  Quote: fzr1000
                  And stick the cons to yourself, experts. "It is necessary to kill such experts" O. Bender.

                  and try not to be rude.
                  1. fzr1000
                    fzr1000 21 November 2015 14: 59
                    +3
                    Blacklist me and rid yourself of me. And from all kinds of "archives". Under EBN, the KGB archives were also "opened". So many documents have been published, and now it turns out that there was a bunch of linden trees.
                    I prefer to deal with a living person, and again, you do not know me, assessing my knowledge of German. So who is brought up here? Till.
                    1. U-96
                      U-96 21 November 2015 19: 20
                      -3
                      Quote: fzr1000
                      Blacklist me and save me from me.

                      why dirty blacklist? You may simply not be noticed. If I remember the collectors of soldier's folklore, Io certainly - about Sasha Cherny. You, I repeat, are of absolutely no interest.
  13. provincial
    provincial 21 November 2015 12: 32
    -3
    Sofas on Yandex.Market
    Discount sofas
    Choose on the Market
  14. Patriot C
    Patriot C 21 November 2015 12: 59
    -6
    Quote: Was Mammoth
    The introduction of troops into Czechoslovakia is a mistake.
    The introduction of troops in Hungary is a mistake
    The introduction of troops into Afghanistan is a mistake.
    But in Poland, not a mistake.
    There was a confrontation between systems and the use of military force was a necessity, not a whim and a mistake. Is the presence of American troops in these countries not a mistake?
    Or maybe the attacks of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria are also a mistake? It is enough to look at the political views, which claim that these are mistakes, to understand who benefits from it.


    My political views are normal. I am a patriot of my country - the Republic of Kazakhstan. and if the troops of any neighboring state enter the territory of my country, I and all my fellow citizens (who are not traitors) will consider this an occupation. The Czechs also considered this an occupation and remembered it for many generations to come. Now it’s very difficult to agree on anything with the Czechs and other former socialist countries, because they remember the times of that occupation. soldier
    1. Evgeniy667b
      Evgeniy667b 21 November 2015 16: 19
      +6
      How did you end up in Kazakhstan? Accidentally (in your mind) is not an invader in the 2-3 knee? And how then to count the Kazakhs in Russia. And they live here and not bad. Soon Sol-Ilek, for example, will have a predominant Kazakh population! There was the Soviet Union, it was equipped and defended by all the peoples inhabiting it. And in Czechoslovakia, I was part of the 15th Guards Engine, which later stood in the city of Milovice. And remember once and for all, the Soviet army was never an occupation !!! She was the guarantor of peace and life. NNA GDR was also there and they very often rescued ours.
    2. saigon
      saigon 21 November 2015 18: 48
      +2
      But I was born and live in Siberia and for me the Czechs are not friends at all. For the civil war in Siberia, for helping the Wehrmacht correctly crushed.
    3. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 01: 35
      +2
      Will you tell us what the inhabitants of Eastern Europe remember? ))) What a low-grade anti-Soviet and Russophobic propaganda))))
    4. The comment was deleted.
  15. Was mammoth
    Was mammoth 21 November 2015 14: 18
    +2
    Quote: PatriotC
    I am a patriot of my country - the Republic of Kazakhstan. and if the troops of any neighboring state enter the territory of my country, I and all my fellow citizens (who are not traitors) will consider this an occupation

    I am glad that you are a patriot!
    Calm down! Russia is not going to occupy Kazakhstan. And who do you think are traitors in Kazakhstan?
    I believe that you, out of patriotic feelings, consider the annexation of Crimea and the result of the war with Georgia an occupation.
  16. Patriot C
    Patriot C 21 November 2015 14: 22
    -5
    Quote: Was Mammoth
    Quote: PatriotC
    I am a patriot of my country - the Republic of Kazakhstan. and if the troops of any neighboring state enter the territory of my country, I and all my fellow citizens (who are not traitors) will consider this an occupation

    I am glad that you are a patriot!
    Calm down! Russia is not going to occupy Kazakhstan. And who do you think are traitors in Kazakhstan?
    I believe that you, out of patriotic feelings, consider the annexation of Crimea and the result of the war with Georgia an occupation.


    How will you feel about a country that will send its troops, for example, to the Leningrad region or to Sakhalin, which will result in the withdrawal of these regions from the Russian Federation?
    1. parusnik
      parusnik 21 November 2015 14: 47
      +3
      and Russia didn’t bring troops into South Ossetia, Abkhazia .. There were troops under the UN mandate as peacekeepers .. It’s already squeezed about Crimea ... there was also an official Russian military base .. by agreement with Ukraine .. this is occupation ..in your opinion ... Crimea was asked to come back ... accepted .. Do you refuse the Crimeans this right? .. When you voted for independence in Kazakhstan .. in due time .. Nobody denied this to you .. why do you refuse others. .? How will you feel about a country that will send its troops, for example, to the Leningrad region or to Sakhalin, which will result in the withdrawal of these regions from the Russian Federation?... This comparison is not correct ..
    2. Dimon19661
      Dimon19661 21 November 2015 15: 26
      +2
      In order to prevent this from happening, Russia is strengthening its defenses and has one of the most powerful armies in the world.
    3. U-96
      U-96 21 November 2015 19: 33
      +2
      Quote: PatriotC
      How will you feel about a country that will send its troops, for example, to the Leningrad region or to Sakhalin, which will result in the withdrawal of these regions from the Russian Federation?

      In general, it is really silly to compare the Prague Spring with some hypothetical introduction of troops into the Republic of Kazakhstan. And then, as an illustration to their own chimeras, for some reason, carry the game about the Leningrad region and Sakhalin. Is this the "limitrophe syndrome" that our Baltic comrades suffer from? So join their Club of anonymous drunkards ... uh-uh ... sorry - Club of anonymous victims of Russian aggression.
    4. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 01: 33
      +3
      How do you feel about the proposal to give all the technical and infrastructure achievements of the Kazakh SSR back to the Russian occupiers? By the way, I remind you that the state of Kazakhstan was created by the Bolsheviks. Do you want to return to the Bolsheviks?
    5. The comment was deleted.
  17. Patriot C
    Patriot C 21 November 2015 15: 18
    -4
    Quote: parusnik
    ... This comparison is not correct ..

    This comparison is quite correct. You applaud if some territories become part of your country and against, if some territories withdraw from your country.
    so why should it be different in other countries?
    if someone comes in tanks to the territory of a foreign country, then let him prepare for the fact that in this country they will justly hate and despise him for many generations. This is an axiom that does not require proof. soldier
    1. parusnik
      parusnik 21 November 2015 15: 43
      +3
      And specifically what do you disagree about in my post? ..and Russia didn’t bring troops into South Ossetia, Abkhazia .. There were troops under the UN mandate as peacekeepers...Do you disagree with this? Yes or no?It’s already squeezed about Crimea ... there was also a Russian military base officially .. by agreement with Ukraine .. it’s an occupation .. according to yours .. Crimea was asked to be returned .. accepted .. Do you refuse Crimeans this right?.. Do you agree yes or no? ..When you voted for independence in Kazakhstan ... in due time ... nobody refused you this ... why do you refuse others ...? ..Here you also agree yes or no?... This comparison is not correct ....Yes, it’s not correct, since so far the Leningrad Region and Sakhalin haven’t announced their entry into Kazakhstan .. And Kazakhstan hasn’t sent troops there ..You applaud if some territories become part of your country and against, if some territories withdraw from your country.
      so why should it be different in other countries?
      ... Specifically, who went out .. And then you all have common words .. write .. Yes, another question .. American troops are in many countries of the world is the occupation .. If so why are you not outraged about this ..?
      1. U-96
        U-96 21 November 2015 19: 11
        0
        Quote: parusnik
        Specifically, what do you disagree with about my post? .. and Russia didn’t send troops to South Ossetia, Abkhazia .. There were troops under the UN mandate as peacekeepers ... Do you disagree? Yes or no?

        Yes, of course. Because there was no UN mandate. As in the PMR. Teach a materiel.
        1. parusnik
          parusnik 21 November 2015 21: 36
          +1
          ..You know the materiel, write .. But the UN and OSCE observers, just like that in the indicated places, will not hang out .. there were agreements .. And for Transdniestria, Abkhazia and Ossetia .. It’s easier to write teach .. Did you learn it yourself? .. Shine with knowledge ..
      2. kotvov
        kotvov 21 November 2015 20: 22
        +3
        If so, why don’t you resent this occasion .. ?,
        it’s impossible to pit. It’s like our hope that what the USA does is good, and what is done without the consent of these states is bad. LIBERAL, S.
        1. U-96
          U-96 21 November 2015 20: 36
          -2
          Quote: kotvov
          it’s impossible to pit. It’s like our hope that what the USA does is good, and what is done without the consent of these states is bad. LIBERAL, S.

          I only pointed out that the commentator blurted out about the UN mandate completely past. However, your label "liberal" makes me neither cold nor hot. It is curious, but everyone here, beloved M. Zakharova, on the air of Vesti FM, called the idiots of those who made this word a dirty word - that is, the media and the online narrow-minded people. By the way, she considers herself a liberal.
          1. cast iron
            cast iron 22 November 2015 03: 01
            +1
            It is not surprising that Zakharova considers herself a liberal, because the government, as liberal since 1991, is left to them.
  18. Dimon19661
    Dimon19661 21 November 2015 15: 23
    0
    Quote: U-96
    Quote: fzr1000
    Do you have a clearance of this level? To the Bundesarchive? Then refute my information by excerpts from there.

    And you are really funny and uninteresting interlocutor. Judging by the level of your sources .. hmm .. "knowledge" - you do not speak German and it is not worth offering you to read Rüdiger Wenzke. Although there may be a Russian translation, I don’t know.
    As for BA ... Imagine - there is tolerance laughing Here is a link to the originals of archival documents with an explanatory article by Suzanne Maine: http: //www.bundesarchiv.de/oeffentlichkeitsarbeit/bilder_dokument
    e / 01095 / index-10.html.de
    Quote: fzr1000
    And stick the cons to yourself, experts. "It is necessary to kill such experts" O. Bender.

    and try not to be rude.

    For many on this forum, a link to a friend of a friend, or a relative of a friend - is the only correct source, so do not pay attention), and I’ll look at the links through the links.
    1. U-96
      U-96 21 November 2015 19: 04
      -1
      Quote: Dimon19661
      For many on this forum, a link to a friend of a friend, or a relative of a friend - is the only correct source, so do not pay attention), and I’ll look at the links through the links.

      I agree. Maybe I'm wrong, and the 20 NPA signalmen (3 officers, 6 counter-officers and 13 signalmen), who were in Milovits until August 25, can and should be considered the very ones:
      Quote: fzr1000
      Germans were the most frostbitten in Prague. They really shot a lot of people. Ours almost went into battle with parts of the GDR because of this.
      ?
  19. ivanovbg
    ivanovbg 21 November 2015 18: 03
    +2
    Bulgaria also participated in the Danube operation by two motorized rifle regiments (12 and 22) and one tank battalion on the T-34.
  20. Patriot C
    Patriot C 22 November 2015 00: 17
    -3
    Quote: Evgeniy667b
    How did you end up in Kazakhstan? Accidentally (in your mind) is not an invader in the 2-3 knee?


    the main thing is citizenship, and nationality is not important. Whether Kazakh, Russian, Ukrainian or Ukrainian ... - this is third-rate, the main thing is to be a citizen of your country. Kazakhstan gained its long-awaited independence thanks, among other things, to Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin, who, being a great man and a historical figure, helped many modern countries and peoples gain independence and freedom. Therefore, Boris Nikolaevich is very respected in our country and in many other countries.
    You are proud of the independence of your country, then why should we be ashamed of the independence of our country? hi
    1. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 01: 31
      +4
      Dear Kazakh nationalist, since when was the independence of Kazakhstan long-awaited until 1991? I remember the all-Soviet referendum showed that more than 80% of the citizens of the USSR do not want any independence. And also, comrade Kazakh nationalist, I will remind you that before the Bolsheviks there was no Kazakhstan and no longing for independence. and such a state never existed before the formation of the USSR under the leadership of the "occupiers" - the Bolsheviks. Your low-grade propaganda is aimed at children.
  21. Patriot C
    Patriot C 22 November 2015 00: 44
    -4
    Quote: Evgeniy667b
    There was the Soviet Union,

    the so-called "sovetsky union" died a natural death long ago. Yes, this is part of the history of our country, but in Kazakhstan, none of the citizens crying through the Soviet Union.
    smile
    Quote: Evgeniy667b
    And remember once and for all, the Soviet army was never an occupation !!!

    You will remember this once and for all: they decide on whether or not some army was occupying, only the inhabitants (peoples) of those countries where such an army invaded or entered.
    The Czechs have long decided that the Soviet army was occupying in 1968. and no one has the right to dispute their decision, because this army crushed them, the Czechs, their freedom.
    1. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 01: 28
      +3
      The so-called USSR did not die, but they killed him. Well-defined people killed, some of whom are still alive. And many citizens of Kazakhstan communicate with you? You apparently interviewed all 15 million? Yes?
      And you apparently asked all the Czechs that you are balaboling about their "decision" with such confidence.
    2. Evgeniy667b
      Evgeniy667b 22 November 2015 05: 13
      +3
      Read your posts Patriot C, well, righteous, there is nowhere to go. And it’s good to be a patriot when a man like Nazarbayev is at the helm. And he is not eternal, a supporter of IS will come to power, what will you think then? There, non-Kazakhs can easily make an ax-head. You've mentioned the "Ural nugget", EBNa-benefactor say? I remember the first meeting with him. All of us were mobilized to harvest potatoes ... and then a helicopter sits down, the door opens and the first secretary (then still) appears in the doorway - the canine does not knit, it is storming. He gave out articulate, and where the people are ... - the accompanying pushed him back, and take off. He squandered a lot of things under a drunken shop ... And you can't judge the Czechs, in Siberia and the Urals they remember their "exploits" in 1918, looting, terror — there really were occupiers!
    3. The comment was deleted.
  22. Truth-lovers
    Truth-lovers 22 November 2015 01: 54
    -4
    Quote: Homo
    And they do not consider the USSR as liberators from fascism? How many would have remained if not for the USSR!
    Actually, I’ll reveal a terrible secret - the majority. They had the rights of Reich citizens. And in order to kill Heydrich, I had to send agents from England! (among the Czechs who lived right there, not a single one was found) And in general, there weren’t any special problems there until 1945, and the regime has become tougher since 1942, but generally got along with each other. Actually, the Czech Republic is always a country within the Austrian Empire.

    Quote: Hiking
    sorry only in the 90s withdrew, the Americans left their troops in Germany.
    Actually, by agreement, the Americans had the right to leave their bases to Munich. Which they did. And 15 years NO AMERICAN TANK east of Germany! The United States, no matter how you twist, but kept the treaties. And the recent events of two years have led the Americans, seeing that the Russian Federation spit on previous agreements, began to actively send their troops into most countries of Eastern Europe - AND BETWEEN OTHERS ASKED ABOUT THIS !!! that's what a shame ...

    Quote: kashtak
    we swami know where the countries of the former Warsaw Pact are now.

    Yes, exactly so, and Hungary in 1956, and Germany in 1953, and the Czech Republic in 1968 - these are stages of the very path that led to the general hatred of "Soviet" (and now Russia) in Eastern Europe.

    Quote: There was a mammoth
    The introduction of troops into Czechoslovakia is a mistake.
    The introduction of troops in Hungary is a mistake
    The introduction of troops into Afghanistan is a mistake.
    Yes, mistakes are a long way. Or is Afghanistan not a mistake? got their own Vietnam, which became one of the factors in the collapse of the state.

    Quote: PatriotC
    The Czechs also considered this an occupation and remembered it for many generations to come.
    Exactly ! I communicate (more precisely, communicate) with the Czechs more than once, these are excellent people, but any mention of the USSR causes real rejection in them. These are very kind and loyal to the ruling regime people (not Hungarians at all!), And the USSR managed to turn them into one of the main enemies.

    Quote: parusnik
    Crimea asked to be returned .. accepted .. Do you refuse the Crimeans this right? .. When you in Kazakhstan voted for independence .. in due time ..
    I will be responsible for a friend. They didn’t ask for 25 years, but then they asked. And by chance, so unknown whose troops appeared. We leave the terrible infusion of money from our country to this stupid Crimea, where some idlers are sitting, who wanted more buns (who could get a dacha in the Crimea under the USSR, eh? My parents were only able to get it in the Volga region, it's good that it wasn't near Vorkuta) ... It was just not a good precedent. For example, Japan wants and will hold such a "referendum" on Sakhalin. And China is in the Amur region ... I am already silent about the Kaliningrad region - God forbid Germany will give citizenship rights to residents, do you think it will not leave the Russian Federation?
    1. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 03: 15
      +3
      Is the US abiding by the agreement? Yah? But why is NATO only expanding since the day the FRG merged with the GDR? Apparently from a lot of love? And why should the United States have tanks in Eastern Europe, if there are quite a few local armies working for NATO and included in the NATO bloc?

      Hatred of the Russians is historical in Europe. Enough school history textbook to leaf through. To pass off the rebellion of the Hungarian Nazis in 1956 as an uprising having forgiven the Soviet regime is powerful. By the way, and with the Czech uprising of 1968, they flopped past. Not the whole country supported him. Or rather, only a small part.

      Afghanistan was a response to US work in the Central Asian region to create Islamofascist countries neighboring with the USSR. It is not clear how it would all end if the traitor Gorbachev did not come to power.

      How many Czechs did you communicate with? With 10? Fifty? With a hundred? Do not flatter yourself and do not give out personal experience of communication for the mood of the whole nation.

      Your parents did not receive a summer residence in the Crimea, because did not live in Crimea. Count it, huh? )) You tell tales about precedents, and there were a lot of such precedents before Crimea. Kosovo, for example. And the division of Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia into a bunch of states was also carried out by democratic methods, and in some places with the NATO armies. Count it, huh? And about Kaliningrad and Sakhalin it’s better to shut up - you’ll be a smart guy.
  23. Patriot C
    Patriot C 22 November 2015 11: 21
    -3
    Quote: cast iron
    Dear Kazakh nationalist,

    I am not a nationalist, I am a patriot of my country. Yes, I have Russian roots and the nationality "Russian" is indicated in my passport. But first and foremost, I am a Citizen of my country - the Republic of Kazakhstan.

    Quote: cast iron
    I will remind you that before the Bolsheviks there was no Kazakhstan and no longing for independence, because and such a state never existed before the formation of the USSR under the leadership of the "occupiers" - the Bolsheviks. Your low-grade propaganda is aimed at children.


    Let me remind you that states, like people, are born and die. My young country has all the best ahead.
    But the Nazis, it’s just you and your kind, groaning after a dead scoop, which nobody needs anywhere but you. soldier
    1. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 20: 17
      +1
      Well, here you are, dear Kazakh nationalist, and have sat in a puddle. Your country was created by Russian Bolshevik invaders. Remember this. Tens of millions of people across the USSR miss the USSR. And not just so bored. The small-town nationalists cannot understand this longing. The scale of Wishlist is too small for you.
      1. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 23 November 2015 00: 23
        +1
        Quote: cast iron
        Well, here you are, dear Kazakh nationalist, and have sat in a puddle. .
        That’s what the speech is about, that this comrade, like me in the comments in 18.18, expresses himself with subtle humor, apparently such an upbringing was given in that country, which is no longer there, or by people from that country. I brought a proverb. And then one says nasty things to everyone, and even to the country.
  24. The comment was deleted.
  25. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 22 November 2015 13: 33
    +1
    I wanted to quote ---- it didn’t work out. I want to say that there is nothing wrong with links to acquaintances. For my part, maybe this is the most valuable thing --- eyewitness accounts. For me it is. This is a Great Country, Great Epoch. Desk studies are printed - this is completely different. Moreover, such events that were hidden.
    All the time I think that the book can be written based on eyewitness accounts on VO SITE. A good book could have been obtained.
  26. Truth-lovers
    Truth-lovers 22 November 2015 13: 35
    -2
    Quote: cast iron
    But why is NATO only expanding since the day the FRG merged with the GDR? Apparently from a lot of love? And why should the United States have tanks in Eastern Europe, if there are quite a few local armies working for NATO and included in the NATO bloc?
    I said this in order to show that the US FOUND all its agreements with the USSR. The fact that Russia began to violate them - well, this is only our choice ... And the armies of the countries of Eastern Europe are ridiculous! they are literally nothing without American tanks! so in fact the only serious threat from the West is the forces of the USA, UK, France and Germany. And the result of our policies of recent years is that they have come to our borders.


    Quote: cast iron
    Not the whole country supported him. Or rather, only a small part.
    To put it mildly, the main part supported him. Moreover, the Czechs DID NOT be as aggressive as the Hungarians - they are DIFFERENT, they have a "positive complementarity" with the Russians, while the Hungarians do not at all. And we, with our inept force, like an elephant in a china shop, turned this people against ourselves.

    Quote: cast iron
    How many Czechs did you communicate with? With 10? Fifty? With a hundred? Do not flatter yourself and do not give out personal experience of communication for the mood of the whole nation.
    I talked with enough to understand, not on the basis of propaganda, but personal experience, the attitude of the Czech people to the "Prague Spring".

    Quote: cast iron
    And the division of Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia into a bunch of states was also carried out by democratic methods, and in some places with the NATO armies.
    It’s all simple - when several neighbors of VERY FRAUDLY HATEING FRIENDS OF A FRIEND are locked in the same room and where they are RETAINED ONLY by STRENGTH, then it is inevitable that when an external holding force leaves, there is a fight for an apartment or, at best, peaceful separation.
    1. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 20: 25
      +2
      I totally agree with you. The result of the policies of the traitor Gorbachev and the drunk Yeltsin is the expansion of NATO to the borders of Russia. There would be no unification of Germany and the abolition of the Warsaw block - there would be no expansion. The policy of concessions to imperialists is always fraught with a military threat and war in the future.

      I don't care what anyone has tuned in. The United States does not care about the mood of 90% of the population of those countries that they have introduced into NATO and the global speculative "economy." If you really understand the moods of ordinary citizens of Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, the Baltic countries and others, then suddenly it turns out that being guest workers in Germany, England and France is not what they dreamed of from the cradle. And the mood can be changed literally in 3-5 years of good propaganda on TV and in schools, which the imperialists have been doing with success for the last 25 years.

      You kept silent with how many Czechs you "communicated")) And was there any "communication" itself? ))) Nobody has ever brought referendums on these specific questions, which means that it is not for you to sing fairy tales about the "mood" of the Czech people.

      Well, with the Crimea, a peaceful division has turned out. For the inhabitants of Crimea since the beginning of the 1990s dreamed of breaking away from the sick on the head of Ukrainian nationalists. Which they did with success. With which I congratulate them. But the East did not fortanul bloodlessly. Here already the western partners tried to make a blood bath.
  27. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 22 November 2015 18: 18
    +1
    In fact, the USSR was a lot of people needed, and people and countries and the whole world. Otherwise, would not have remembered so many people. Since I am not at home - I read in pieces and write as well.
    There is an old Russian proverb: I came to visit - behave yourself decently.
  28. Patriot C
    Patriot C 23 November 2015 17: 17
    -2
    Quote: cast iron
    How do you feel about the proposal to give all the technical and infrastructure achievements of the Kazakh SSR back to the Russian occupiers?

    I am a Russian Kazakhstani and do not consider myself an occupier. Independent Kazakhstan is my country and I do not need another country. Kazakhstan's infrastructural achievements are the common property of all 17 million Kazakhstanis.

    Quote: cast iron
    By the way, I remind you that the state of Kazakhstan was created by the Bolsheviks. Do you want to return to the Bolsheviks?

    Only after you return to the true owners:
    Koenigsberg of Germany,
    Vyborg Finland
    Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan, Habomai of Japan,
    Crimea Crimean Tatar Khanate
    Siberia to the Siberian Khanate
    Kazan to the Kazan Khanate.
    etc.
    but you do not want to return these territories, so leave your stupidest offer of "return" in your damp dreams. wink
    1. beeper
      beeper 22 August 2018 18: 25
      +1
      "Only after you return to the true owners:
      Koenigsberg of Germany,
      Vyborg Finland
      Iturup, Kunashir, Shikotan, Habomai of Japan,
      Crimea Crimean Tatar Khanate
      Siberia to the Siberian Khanate
      Kazan to the Kazan Khanate.
      etc."
      "Wet dreams" of Kazakhstani "PatriotAS" ?! winked smile
      Was it possible that the Russian territories, which were cut by the Bolsheviks-allegedly "occupiers" of the Kazakh SSR founded by them, were conquered by "Kazakh patriots" in battle ?!
      "Patriots" who, without the Bolshevik "occupational new formations", would not even have this "national" name and their own script, and there would be nothing to "translate into Latin" the nomadic Kyrgyz, today's Russophobic "Kazakhstanis" ?! smile
      Note, "Patriots", the heroic participation in the defense of the MULTINATIONAL Soviet Union of the natives of the MULTINATIONAL Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic do not deny at all and I respect the Defenders of the Republic of Ingushetia and the USSR, we ALL fought in the same ranks!
      But I have no respect for the newly-born small-town "wet patriots" of the territories of the RI-USSR, torn off in a lively way, "ransomed by the Bolsheviks"!