Military Review

Lost Kars

48
If you ask citizens on the streets what territories the former Russian Empire lost after the 1917 revolution of the year and the Civil War, then Poland, Finland or the Baltic States are most often remembered. More rarely, Bessarabia annexed by Romania. Transcaucasia sounds extremely rare, despite considerable territorial losses in favor of Turkey. The city of Kars went to the Russian Empire under the San Stefano Peace Treaty and for four long years was in its composition. Until now, in those places you can find a lot of houses, which in Russia are called pre-revolutionary buildings. Even the construction of windows is more typical of the traditionally Russian, although politically this region is not Russian for almost a hundred years.


Lost Kars


According to the Brest Peace Treaty with Soviet Russia, and then, according to the Kars Treaty with the republics of the Transcaucasus, the entire region retreated to Turkey, and this territory was immediately seized by its troops. The Armenian population had been largely driven out before, and its cultural heritage was destroyed. To this day, the ruins of Armenian churches are clearly guessed among the local landscape.





Why did it happen so? First of all, because the Turks before the Russians managed to overcome the chaos that arose after the First World War and the collapse of the empire. Having crystallized as a nation and having built capable institutions of a new state in the shortest possible time, Turkey received before Russia historical an advantage that she immediately realized. For Soviet Russia at that moment, it was critical to get a calm border in the south and break through the diplomatic blockade. The loss of a remote area seemed an acceptable exchange. By the way, Armenia was weakening along the way, the elite of which had recently actively been eager for independence.



Concessions are highlighted in light gray.







Later in Soviet historiography, this concession was not liked to be remembered. After all, if the losses in the west could be attributed to the machinations of Germany and the Entente, then Kars and the surrounding territories, it seems, gave themselves away. And it makes no sense to grieve that the honeymoon of Soviet Russia and Turkey ended so soon. After all, in politics there are no eternal friends or eternal enemies. There are only eternal interests.





On this, by the way, the history of Kars might not have ended. In 1946, Stalin decided to punish Ankara for allowing German ships to enter the Black Sea during World War II and other similarly dubious actions. The Georgian and Armenian SSR put forward territorial claims to Turkey, which provided for the return of lost land with interest. To confirm the seriousness of intentions, parts of the Soviet army began to advance to positions in the Transcaucasus and Northern Iran. At the same time, there was a similar movement in Bulgaria, from which it was supposed to march on Istanbul, in which, following the results of the invasion, it was supposed to set up Soviet military bases.



Turkey, which had no chance against the USSR, did the only thing left for it - it made a diplomatic noise, in the hope of helping Britain and the United States. The calculation was justified in full. Western allies, frightened by the unprecedented strengthening of the power of the USSR, were ready to use a nuclear bomb in the Soviet Union and Moscow had to abandon its intentions to return the lost part of Transcaucasia.



In 1953, the USSR abandoned claims for Kars. Turkey by the time a year was in NATO. Modern Armenia does not recognize the Treaty of Kars, and Georgia denounced it after the Ajarian crisis of 2004, when Turkey threatened to send troops into Batumi, relying on this document.
Author:
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. D-Master
    D-Master 18 November 2015 06: 47 New
    +6
    History is fraught with a host of key points for which blood can be shed at any time. Kars is one of them. God forbid a new world war, in Transcaucasia the theme of Kars will arise immediately with renewed vigor. Alas.
  2. Kibalchish
    18 November 2015 07: 38 New
    +5
    There, even the streets are similar to Russian.
  3. sabakina
    sabakina 18 November 2015 09: 38 New
    +2
    1. T. authors, you are careful with the headlines, I already thought with our Kars what happened.
    2. The architecture of my Kostroma is very similar ...
  4. Gomunkul
    Gomunkul 18 November 2015 09: 46 New
    +4
    If you ask citizens in the streets what territories the former Russian Empire lost after the 1917 revolutions and the Civil War
    Let's hope that the time has passed when the stones were scattered, and the time comes when they need to be collected. hi Thanks to the author for the reminder.
  5. traveler
    traveler 18 November 2015 09: 50 New
    -8
    a quarter of a century has already been separated as the Caucasus, and the author grieves for the Transcaucasus.
    Apparently, he just drove in those places, took a couple of houses and took a decision so that the good would not be lost in the article.
  6. Ivan Tartugai
    Ivan Tartugai 18 November 2015 10: 46 New
    +4
    An interesting article, especially interesting photos.
    There would be more captions for photographs, namely what street, as it was called earlier.
    What kind of building, what was located in it in the Russian period and what now.
    The city of Kars is similar to our small cities, where people do not live very prosperously, not to mention wealth.
  7. Basil50
    Basil50 18 November 2015 11: 39 New
    +6
    For this, we can only thank the Nazis of Transcaucasia, both Armenian and Georgian. At the beginning of the 20th century, Armenian and Georgian nationalists massacred the neighbors and, having received a rebuff, were very dissatisfied with the results, and at the end of the last century they again tried to destroy the neighbors, received a rebuff and now require the * world * community to resolve the issue in their favor *.
    The position of the Georgian church towards * non-Georgians * and especially towards the RUSSIANs is indicative. The appeals of the Georgian * Pope * against RUSSIAN are also indicative.
  8. ism_ek
    ism_ek 18 November 2015 12: 08 New
    +5
    Armenians always remembered that 2/3 of their country turned out to be from Turkey. In Turkey, there was even a symbol of Armenia, Mount Ararat.
  9. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 18 November 2015 13: 34 New
    +5
    How much I live --- I always regret the territorial losses of Our Country, incl. and in America. I also regret about what was not, but could have been (written on the pages of the Military Archive).
    Sincerely.
  10. xtur
    xtur 18 November 2015 14: 10 New
    +7
    > Why did this happen? First of all, because the Turks before the Russians managed to overcome the chaos that arose after the First World War and the collapse of the empire. Having crystallized as a nation and building the capable institutions of a new state in the shortest possible time, Turkey gained a historical advantage over Russia, which it immediately realized. For Soviet Russia at that moment, it was critical to get a calm border in the south and break through the diplomatic blockade. The loss of a remote area seemed an acceptable exchange. By the way, Armenia was weakening along the way, the elite of which had recently actively been eager for independence.

    kg / am
    The author raised an important topic, but for some reason decided to cast a shadow on the wattle fence. The truth lies in the full interaction of Russia with Turkey, the reason for which was not named.

    For example, Turkey was then completely defeated - the Greek troops fought near Ankara, and if Russia did not help with weapons, gold and experienced military leaders (Frunze), Turkey would be divided between Greece, Armenia (respectively Russia). Therefore, no logic — simple or complex — can explain Russia’s position on the Turkish issue.

    Armenia did not strive for independence, it is easy to verify that Georgia and Azerbaijan declared independence first and only then Armenia - for there was no other choice, given the absence of the border between Armenia and Russia. And the ruling party in Armenia was the Armenian Socialist Revolutionaries (Dashnaks), who even today are quite revolutionary and communist, including no ideological differences with the authorities in Russia at that time.
    Russian-speaking users can familiarize themselves with the material part of what is happening, that is, with history, through Wikipedia, which gives a short but adequate summary of the events taking place then.

    So personally, I will be grateful to everyone who will be able to explain to me why the Bolsheviks needed to surrender territories to Turkey, for which RI paid quite a lot of blood for Russian soldiers. Personally, I do not see nor any ideological, geopolitical, or economic arguments to give territories paid for by the blood of Russian soldiers.

    And for popular readings, one can use Pikul's historical novels, which are quite suitable for familiarizing with examples of the heroism of Russian soldiers in the Russian-Turkish wars.

    And I do not recall the moral aspect - that to give Turkey, which arranged the genocide of the Armenian population, any Armenian territories is below any low moral standard.
    1. Gomunkul
      Gomunkul 18 November 2015 14: 25 New
      +5
      Therefore, no logic — simple or complex — can explain Russia’s position on the Turkish issue.
      The logic was: World Revolution. yes
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Oprichnik
      Oprichnik 18 November 2015 14: 28 New
      +1
      Because in power in Russia in the 20s, there was a non-Russian government.
      1. Basil50
        Basil50 18 November 2015 16: 04 New
        +1
        In Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan in the 90s, what happened in the 20s was mirrored. They cut RUSSIAN and * Russian-speaking *, and demanded that RUSSIA send an army to solve their own internal problems. What then, what today, the Nazi parties of Transcaucasia are quite * in the spirit of the times * blaming RUSSIANS and RUSSIA for everything and demanding from RUSSIA to solve the problems of the Caucasus. They do not even burden themselves with gratitude for preserving themselves as one of the nations. Maybe there are sane people there, but we hear only the Nazis and those who choose their own government with * amazing * statements. We also see * persons of Caucasian nationality * with irresponsible conceit and the behavior of savages.
        1. Karlos
          Karlos 18 November 2015 19: 56 New
          -2
          Vasily, why lie so frankly? When Russians were cut out in Armenia, what are you talking about ?!
          1. Whitesnow
            Whitesnow 18 November 2015 20: 23 New
            -2
            That is yes. In Armenia, Russians were not slaughtered. They were simply driven away with pissed rags. Yes, and there were them under the USSR as much as THREE percent.
            1. xtur
              xtur 18 November 2015 20: 41 New
              0
              > Wow. In Armenia, Russians were not slaughtered. They were simply driven away with pissed rags. Yes, and there were them under the USSR as much as THREE percent.

              yeah, because we Molokans live and prosper:

              http://www.golosarmenii.am/article/34654/net-mesta-luchshe


              and Pushkin street in the center of Yerevan.
              1. Basil50
                Basil50 18 November 2015 20: 59 New
                0
                * Persons of Caucasian nationalities * are no longer perceived as normal, and by their actions, including on the Internet, you will wait for exile to * their historical homeland *. Patience is not endless, it’s time you and people become. Moreover, both in Stalin and L Beria and many others should be an example for you and your fellow tribesmen. It’s time for you to move from the tribal system to the next social structure. Evolve. After all, you yourself understand that I'm right.
              2. The comment was deleted.
    4. Rusich is not from Kiev
      Rusich is not from Kiev 19 November 2015 04: 32 New
      +1
      Quote: xtur
      For example, Turkey was then completely defeated - the Greek troops fought near Ankara, and if Russia did not help with weapons, gold and experienced military leaders (Frunze), Turkey would be divided between Greece, Armenia (respectively Russia). Therefore, no logic — simple or complex — can explain Russia’s position on the Turkish issue.

      It is simply ridiculous to say that the help of Soviet Russia saved Turkey. You can just read how many weapons were sent. There is not even enough fighting for a division for a month. It’s just that the Greeks threw the Entente to save Ata-Turk, which became an ally of the West and began to build a new Turkey and abandoned the idea of ​​an empire. That is, he acknowledged that all Arab lands are not the lands of the Turks, which means that the West legally "took protection" of these lands. So, nothing depended on SR.
      The Soviets hoped that he would restore the Ottoman Empire and, as the losing side, would be on their side and help raise uprisings against the capitalists in the BV. When Ata-Turk chose the west, the SR chose the simplest and easiest ways to save Owls in Transcaucasia. Power is to give the land that the Turks requested.
      Quote: xtur
      Armenia did not strive for independence, it is easy to verify that Georgia and Azerbaijan declared independence first and only then Armenia - for there was no other choice, given the absence of the border between Armenia and Russia. And the ruling party in Armenia was the Armenian Socialist Revolutionaries (Dashnaks), who even today are quite revolutionary and communist, including no ideological differences with the authorities in Russia at that time.

      This is just a blatant lie. All three countries wanted independence and the order of exit did not matter. The Dashniks fought for independence back in the Republic of Ingushetia, and when the Entente decided to create an Armenian state, they openly talked about independence.
      It was another matter when nothing came of the Greater Armenia and the Armenians realized that they would simply be destroyed without the SR, but they did not want to be Soviet and obey Moscow. The plan was simple - to gain territory with the help of the SR and become its ally, but not to be in the USSR.
      Quote: xtur
      Russian-speaking users can familiarize themselves with the material part of what is happening, that is, with history, through Wikipedia, which gives a short but adequate summary of the events taking place then.

      And who wrote it? Maybe you? No thanks, but go to Wikipedia yourself.

      Below continued the answer.
      1. xtur
        xtur 19 November 2015 14: 22 New
        -2
        > It is simply ridiculous to say that the help of Soviet Russia saved Turkey. You can just read how many weapons were sent. There is not even enough fighting for a division for a month.

        sometimes this is quite enough

        > The Soviets hoped that he would restore the Ottoman Empire and as the losing side would be on their side and help to raise uprisings against the capitalists in the BV.

        you know the principle - "you have to take yours!" ? they say better a tit in their hands than a crane in the sky. So - Western Armenia had access to the Black Sea coast, and access to the Mediterranean Sea, just next to Syria.

        If the brains are the rest you will understand.

        > This is just an impudent lie. All three countries wanted independence and the order of exit did not matter.

        tried to write sober? But in vain.

        Then Samsonov talked about the course of the First World War on the Caucasian front. And all of a sudden, after the Brest Peace, the entire Caucasian army withdrew and went home, exposing a huge front. And Armenia did not have statehood, because before the Brest Peace it was part of the Republic of Ingushetia. There is no statehood, no army.
        The army had to be urgently organized; the Turks were stopped with great difficulty almost near Yerevan.

        As under such conditions, the people and the elite could wish for independence, the maps could lie differently, and the Turks could not be stopped even near Yerevan. Then the genocide of the entire population of Eastern Armenia would be guaranteed.

        With such risks, no sane people and elite would ever strive for independence.

        > Greater Armenia

        Друкare you from which universe? Greater Armenia ended during the genocide. Give yourself work, find out what it is when the first genocide occurred, etc.

        > And who wrote it? Maybe you? No thanks, but go to Wikipedia yourself.

        the content of the article is determined by the person in charge, if what I write does not suit him, he simply rolls back the changes.

        In general, read what you want on this topic from serious historians. But it’s hard to believe that you are reading something, otherwise you would not have carried this nonsense about Greater Armenia, about the desire for independence of the people that were recently cut out, about the fact that Turkey could fight on two fronts, about the fact that the Mediterranean coast the sea was not a good geopolitical position for Russia
        1. Rusich is not from Kiev
          Rusich is not from Kiev 19 November 2015 17: 25 New
          +1
          Quote: xtur
          sometimes this is quite enough

          To win is not enough, even returning Asia Minor is not enough.
          Quote: xtur
          you know the principle - "you have to take yours!" ? they say better a tit in their hands than a crane in the sky. So - Western Armenia had access to the Black Sea coast, and access to the Mediterranean Sea, just next to Syria.

          What did she have? What are you writing about. What’s there that the Armenian army was waiting for the Russian help? This exit is only on the maps, and it needs to be taken, which means sending an army which the CP did not have. You look at realities, not maps and include brains.
          Quote: xtur
          tried to write sober? But in vain.

          Have you tried reading sometimes, or doesn’t nationalism allow again?
          Quote: xtur
          Then Samsonov talked about the course of the First World War on the Caucasian front. And all of a sudden, after the Brest Peace, the entire Caucasian army withdrew and went home, exposing a huge front.

          Firstly, not all of a sudden, but because a revolution began in Russia and the WWII ended. Why would the Russians stand in the Caucasus if the warrior is over? Secondly, almost all weapons were left to dashniks and Georgians, and Russian soldiers were slaughtered unarmed on the way to Russia. For example, in Tiflis, when Georgians killed almost 2.000 unarmed soldiers.
          Whether you had the army or not, Russia doesn’t care. We had a revolution, they left you a weapon.
          Quote: xtur
          As under such conditions the people and the elite could wish for independence, the cards could lie differently,

          With such risks, no sane people and elite would ever strive for independence.

          The people may not want independence, but the dashniki wanted it. So the Nazis (dashniki) are not sane. You better read with whom the dashniks led the warrior first, this is with Georgia and Azerbaijan instead of organizing an army.
          Quote: xtur
          Druk, what universe are you from? Greater Armenia ended during the genocide. Give yourself work, find out what it is when the first genocide occurred, etc.

          I do not accidentally communicate with the child? Do you know about the 1920 Servs Treaty? Read and then talk. To get started on Wiki.
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Севрский_мирный_договор
          Quote: xtur
          the content of the article is determined by the person in charge, if what I write does not suit him, he simply rolls back the changes.

          And who is this person and what is his responsibility? Surname, first name.

          Quote: xtur
          otherwise, this nonsense about Greater Armenia, about the desire for independence of the people that had recently been cut out, about the fact that Turkey could fight on two fronts, about

          The Servic Treaty of 1920 is a fact, and the dashniks didn’t refuse it for some reason, although in your words the Armenians were cut out there.
          That is, Turkey could not, but Russia which surrendered its original Russian lands should and could fight for the original Armenian? Russia in 1920 was no longer a superpower and it was not interested in access to the Mediterranean Sea, is it really incomprehensible?
          1. Basil50
            Basil50 19 November 2015 22: 28 New
            0
            Rusich not from Kiev. You are right, Ararat and the adjacent lands are declared by the Armenians as theirs and demand from the RUSSIANS to return all this to the Armenians. Then something else you want and again RUSSIA will * must *. Maybe it's time for the Armenians to do something themselves?
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Stanislas
            Stanislas 20 November 2015 20: 33 New
            0
            Quote: Rusich not from Kiev
            dashniki
            Dashnaks, probably.
    5. Rusich is not from Kiev
      Rusich is not from Kiev 19 November 2015 04: 32 New
      +1
      Quote: xtur
      So personally, I will be grateful to everyone who will be able to explain to me why the Bolsheviks needed to surrender territories to Turkey, for which RI paid quite a lot of blood for Russian soldiers. Personally, I do not see any ideological, geopolitical, or economic arguments to give up the territories paid for by the blood of Russian soldiers.

      I wrote above. So the Russian soldiers did not die there for the interests of the Armenians. RI had its own views of this territory right up to its settlement by Cossacks, against which the Armenians categorically opposed, and some of them still threatened with terrorist attacks and massacres. You do not see them, but I see. There is no sense in fighting with Turkey, and then most likely with Antantoi for the interests of the Armenians. The SR had no geopolitical interests there at that time, and besides, the country was destroyed by civilian warriors.
      Quote: xtur
      And I do not recall the moral aspect - that to give Turkey, which organized the genocide of the Armenian population, any Armenian territories is below any low moral standard

      Again, Russia to you, something must be moral? SR retained its part of Armenia and did not give it to Turkey, and even those lands were always Ottoman and let the Turks or the League of the Nation bear moral responsibility for this on the edge of cases.

      P.S. The Russians do not owe you anything, say thank you for creating the Armenian state in general and turning a blind eye to it. that you have squeezed out the local Turkic population since the time of RI.
      1. xtur
        xtur 19 November 2015 14: 29 New
        -1
        > So the Russian soldiers did not die there for the interests of the Armenians.

        where did I write about the fact that Russian soldiers were dying for the interests of the Armenians? In Russia, under the rule of Russia, life is better than in Turkey and under the rule of the Turks.

        You have given serious strategic positions, for the acquisition of which they shed a sea of ​​blood of your soldiers. And they gave them not for a snuff of tobacco. So you can not apply to the blood shed by his own people.

        > Again, Russia to you, something must be moral?

        Genodits is a crime against humanity, if you do not punish such criminals when there is such an opportunity, then they come for you. Didn’t Hitler refer directly to the Armenian genocide, encouraging his soldiers to slaughter Russians in the USSR - “who now remembers the Armenian genocide?” Specifically, now in Ukraine, did not Bandera try to genocide the Russians?

        You druk, it’s better not to write on topics where you don’t have knowledge and overall development is not enough.
        1. Rusich is not from Kiev
          Rusich is not from Kiev 19 November 2015 16: 50 New
          0
          Quote: xtur
          where did I write about the fact that Russian soldiers were dying for the interests of the Armenians? In Russia, under the rule of Russia, life is better than in Turkey and under the rule of the Turks.

          Well, I realized that Russian soldiers were dying for the interests of the Republic of Ingushetia, and politics is such a thing that interests are changing. This is not our land, and we gave it back because our land was in danger. Well, I personally do not care where you live safely.

          Quote: xtur
          You have given serious strategic positions, for the acquisition of which they shed a sea of ​​blood of your soldiers. And they gave them not for a snuff of tobacco. So you can not apply to the blood shed by his own people.

          Do not you talk about blood. The Angles didn’t shed blood there and did not soar. There are no our interests from the word at all. If in the 19th century there were still, then in the 20th century there is no. The base in Armenia is enough for us, and in fact it does not play a role, except for protecting the Armenians. Russia didn’t give anything. We lost the WWI and gave the territory that's all. Kars never belonged to the Russians at all, as did the Armenians.
          Quote: xtur
          Genodits is a crime against humanity, if you do not punish such criminals when there is such an opportunity, then they come for you.

          Once again, Russia defended its Armenians from genocide, but those were to be defended by the League of Nation because Turkey is another state. So there are claims to them.
          Quote: xtur
          Did Hitler not refer directly to the Armenian Genocide, encouraging his soldiers to slaughter Russians in the USSR - "who now remembers the Armenian Genocide?"

          Do not write garbage. Hitler had a racial theory which he took from European philosophers and the fate of the Armenians is not a decree for him. He divided people into people and subhuman that's all.
          Quote: xtur
          Specifically, now in Ukraine, did not Bandera try to genocide the Russians?

          They are the Nazis. Seichas genocide of Russians, tomorrow you Armenians as in due time in Galicia. They do not care.
          Quote: xtur
          You are a druck, it’s better not to write on topics where you don’t have any knowledge and overall development is not enough.

          To assert this, one must first at least refute my arguments with real facts. You just write to me that "you can’t give for what shed blood" and "genocide is bad, so the Russians should be punished." In addition to propaganda, you have zero knowledge.
    6. Turkir
      Turkir 19 November 2015 09: 49 New
      +2
      The author raised an important topic, but for some reason decided to cast a shadow on the wattle fence.

      Lenin at all costs wanted to save the Republic. I gave Ukraine to the Germans ..
      What did he and the Bolsheviks have before some small, distant territories of the former RI?
      Heavy 1918, 1919 years of the Civil War. Brother kills brother ...
      In order to draw any conclusions, you need to see the whole picture of what was happening in neighboring countries.
      And I do not recall the moral aspect - that to give Turkey, which arranged the genocide of the Armenian population, any Armenian territories is below any low moral standard.

      Loud statement. I will ask a counter question.
      If these territories are originally Armenian, which I personally have no doubt about, why should Russian soldiers fight for them, after three years of heavy war and revolution as a result of which a civil war is taking place in the country? Why didn’t Dashnaktsutyun conquer these lands on their own? What is the matter of Armenia led by Dashnakatsutyun to some kind of Brest peace?
      I want to remind you that in 1918, first German and then British troops were in Georgia. Armenia does not have a common border with Russia. And, there is no longer a state, the Republic of Ingushetia, which included and under the auspices of which Armenia was.
      What moral obligations can we talk about? Yes, also in politics.
      Is the state of Armenia guided by its moral principles in its policy or are security principles taken into account?
      Apparently, the Bolsheviks and Dashnaks, who did not begin to conquer the occupied territories, were guided by the same security principles.
      So who is casting a shadow on the wattle fence?
      1. xtur
        xtur 19 November 2015 14: 35 New
        -1
        > Lenin at all costs wanted to save the Republic. I gave Ukraine to the Germans ..

        these are the consequences of the Brest Peace, this is 1918. And the Kars and Moscow treaties are already 1920 and after

        As for the genocide, and the fact that this is a crime against humanity, and what turns out to be the lack of punishment for such criminals, I wrote at http://topwar.ru/86329-poteryannyy-kars.html#5240542

        and http://topwar.ru/86329-poteryannyy-kars.html#5240506

        in these two messages there is an answer to all your other questions
        1. Rusich is not from Kiev
          Rusich is not from Kiev 19 November 2015 16: 54 New
          0
          Quote: xtur
          these are the consequences of the Brest Peace, this is 1918. And the Kars and Moscow treaties are already 1920 and after

          The contract of Karskii is a consequence of Brest, can you really not see? We lost at home, why should we fight for Kars if our country fell apart.
      2. Rusich is not from Kiev
        Rusich is not from Kiev 19 November 2015 16: 55 New
        0
        Quote: Turkir
        If these territories are originally Armenian, which I personally have no doubt

        Well, in vain. Armenians there never constituted the majority. Usually a third, in some places half the population.
  11. Selevc
    Selevc 18 November 2015 15: 03 New
    0
    The author of the article forgot about one important non-material aspect ... On the territory given to the Turks is the national shrine of the Armenians - Mount Ararat ... Therefore, I think that the loss of territories was especially painful for Armenia ...
    1. xtur
      xtur 18 November 2015 20: 34 New
      +1
      > there is a national shrine of the Armenians-Mount Ararat.

      Ararat, in general, for the good, should be a shrine for all Christians, and for Jews, and even for Muslims.
  12. summer
    summer 18 November 2015 16: 14 New
    -2
    History of the Crimean War 53-56 poorly studied at school - alas, they did ... they played a campaign, sir ... But the Paris Peace Treaty of the 56th, then the war of 77-78. and, as a consequence of it, the San Stefano Peace and the subsequent renegade Berlin treatise of the Berlin Congress; the history of the creation, in particular, of the Kingdom of Romania (and, as evidence of “gratitude” in the future, the Romanian campaign of 1916-1917) would be a good lesson and a map of placing a rake on the field of history.

    The emphasis in the study of history should be shifted from pseudo-patriotic praise of the achievements and achievements of Russia to a balanced study of all, both positive and negative aspects of relations with its historical neighbors. Studying the history of Turkey, Iran, Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, the Baltic states, Ukraine, Central Asia, Mongolia, China, etc., at least superficially, will allow young people to adequately perceive modern Russian politics in the context of a complex joint history. The current actions of Russia without an explanation of the centuries-old driving forces do not really convince young people who are not prepared for the concept of historical laws.

    With all this, I understand that only percent of this knowledge will sprout in the head. But "something" is still more than "nothing."

    Thanks to the author.
    1. Pissarro
      Pissarro 18 November 2015 23: 56 New
      +3
      History of the Crimean War 53-56 poorly studied at school - alas, pros .. played a campaign, sir ..


      This is an absolutely ridiculous statement, popular among liberals and Russophobia mantras. The enemy took the price of incredible long-term efforts of the city of Sevastopol, with the complete success of the Russians in the Caucasus with the capture of Kars and the complete defeat of the enemy in Kamchatka, the failure of attacks in the Baltic and the North. There is only one reason for peace with the adversary , the king died, who laid down on the opinion of Europe and was not inclined to compromise. And the heiress was rotten, he suffered from liberalism, he began his reign with a stupid peace treaty, he sold Alaska later and in the end he received an absolutely deserved bomb from the mess that he had made. Nicholas walked alone on Peter, and even no one thought he would encroach on him. The heir, of all the options, always acted on the worst
      1. summer
        summer 19 November 2015 10: 19 New
        -1
        Firstly, Sevastopol, not Paris.

        Secondly, they didn’t take it, but left it.

        Thirdly, half a city, you say? It’s the same as leaving Moscow east of the Moscow Ring Road and declaring that half of Moscow is ours. The north side of Sevastopol in 1855 is half the city? Have you been there, in that Sevastopol? At least once?

        Fourth, the “long-standing siege,” you say? Vicki says so - "For 11 months of the siege, the Allies lost ...". But .. "What is he to Hekuba, what is he to Hekuba?"

        Comrades, you are being deceived. The monument is opened to Tolstoy, and "Mum" was written by Turgenev!

        And then Alexander to Alaska, if "Catherine, you were wrong"? am laughing

        Artists who had a lot of free time, willingly led Ostap and Balaganov to Theophan Mukhin. Theophanes worked in his kindergarten, in the open air. Comrade Plotsky was sitting on a stool in front of him, a man apparently shy. Without breathing, he looked at the artist, who, like a sower on a three-piece paper, grabbed handfuls of oats from a basket and threw it on the canvas. Mukhin frowned. Sparrows interfered with him. They boldly flew up to the picture and pecked out individual details from it.
        - How much will you get for this picture? asked Plotsky shyly.
        Theophanes stopped sowing, critically looked at his work and answered thoughtfully:
        -- Well! The museum will give two hundred and fifty rubles for it.
        “However, it's expensive.”
        “But oats today,” said Mukhin, melodiously, “you won’t buy it.”
        He is dear, oats!
        “Well, how's the spring wedge?” - asked Ostap, sticking his head through the bars of the kindergarten. - The campaign, I see, is going well. One hundred percent! But - all this is nonsense compared to what I saw in Moscow. There, one artist made a picture of hair. The big picture with many figures, mind you, ideologically sustained, although the artist used the hair of non-partisans, was such a sin. But ideologically, I repeat, the picture was remarkably seasoned. It was called "Grandfather Groin and a tractor in the night."
        Theophanes was not embarrassed.
        “That sounds like a paradox,” he remarked, resuming sowing manipulations.

        “Okay,” said Ostap, saying goodbye, “sow rational, good, eternal, and we'll see!” Goodbye you servants. Drop your oil paints. Go to the mosaic of nuts, crutches and cogs. Portrait of the nuts! Great idea!


        If you return to ours today .. Dear, go to alternative specialists, to Fomenko.

        I expect from you, dear, panegyrics in honor of the victory of Russia in the Japanese war of 1904-5.

        God, save Russia from the "patriots", and it will cope with enemies.
        1. Pissarro
          Pissarro 19 November 2015 22: 05 New
          +1
          Comrade, do you study the story of Lube songs? laughing
          Alaska was sold by Alexander the Second in 1867.
          1. summer
            summer 19 November 2015 23: 00 New
            +1
            Sergey, I understand .. Exhausting Arabian heat. Not to notice emoticons ... ????
            I gave you a chance - thank God you took advantage of it. The score was not 4: 0, but 4: 1. lol (except for Mumu ...)

            I’m just warning you about the unethical nature of rude peremptory assaults on a stranger to you, i.e. on me.

            You have the right to your assessment of the historical person, but ...
            If possible, such a non-trivial point of view follows, as yours on Alexander II the Liberator, at least somehow correctly substantiate. The story of Alaska is far from as simple as it seems at first glance. In short, Alexander Nikolaevich stretched out his legs for clothes.

            And don’t swing left and right with your minuses - it looks like petty revenge - after all, in essence of my remarks you had nothing to say. You would better expand your argument set.

            I wish you success not in cavalry assaults, but in studying the history of the Russian state.
            1. Rusich is not from Kiev
              Rusich is not from Kiev 20 November 2015 11: 59 New
              0
              Quote: summer
              I wish you success not in cavalry assaults, but in studying the history of the Russian state.

              Actually, you also would not hurt to study it.

              In short, Sasha himself did not understand. what is he doing. And on clothes then it was necessary to sell everything up to the Urals. Here you are all Americans judge for money))
              1. summer
                summer 20 November 2015 17: 03 New
                +1
                In short. You, Rusich, are neither from Kiev, nor from Alaska, and not from 1867.

                “Sasha” at that time could not even hold Alaska by force, not to mention financial opportunities. If he knew about the gold deposits of Klondike and Yukon or about oil, which after only half a century had become a valuable raw material resource.

                But this is already about the "grandmother", which under certain circumstances "would be a grandfather."
                1. Rusich is not from Kiev
                  Rusich is not from Kiev 20 November 2015 22: 46 New
                  0
                  It is not a matter of whether or not it could be, this is a different matter and here I agree that I sold it correctly.

                  The question is how Sasha solved this question. The conclusion, as it were, is one. This is not a state husband. and downtime the merchant of the first guild.
            2. Pissarro
              Pissarro 20 November 2015 13: 04 New
              0
              I do not put cons to anyone, this is not for me.
              I just wrote that Alexander II divorced the empire’s mess, all these Narodnaya Volya, Nigelists and other populists went with his reforms, it’s not a matter of opinion and discussion, but a reinforced concrete fact. Like the fact that he sold Alaska for some reason, without the slightest need
              And as for the “liberator,” yes, he freed the peasants from their land. Before the liberation, the peasants belonged to the landowner, and the land to the community, that is, one part of the landowner's property processed the second. After the peasants were told, bring down the figs, or buy the land. the first Russian revolution of 1905. As I wrote, I carried out a reform on the worst of the options.
              1. summer
                summer 20 November 2015 17: 11 New
                -1
                Sergei, you basically accused Alexander II of the fact that the majority credits him.
                He began and triumphantly ended the war with Turkey, freed the peasants from serfdom. The king is a reformer.

                And were there any other options? Reforms ripened, and someone was supposed to be the first. The fact that the peasants suffered in the sense of losing land due to their poverty is a fact. And who would have allowed Alexander II to carry out reforms in favor of the peasants and to the detriment of the nobles? The nobles?

                Do not forget, Tsar A II had a relationship with Ulyanov, Lenin, who had a very distant relationship (through his brother, and even that captain’s acquaintance lol ) That is, the tsar did not finish Lenin’s gymnasiums; he was on the other side of good and evil in matters of class struggle. Your accusations are that Alexander was not a consistent Marxist-Leninist, i.e. Bolshevik, did not defend “the laboring peasantry as a class” should be rejected as absurd. If one of the two of them influenced the other, then the tsar’s influence on Lenin was a little more than the other way around. repeat

                Any reform is a compromise of interests. Both sides - nobles and peasants won something and lost something. Even the IVS reforms cause unremitting “shit-boiling” with all their obvious success.

                Suppose the king of reforms did not carry out. Do you seriously believe that in the twenty-first century in the east of Europe there would be despotism at the level of modern Riyadh?

                You, Sergey, are an unrestrained optimist when you evaluate the Liberator's reforms as the worst option. Perfection has no limits, including those with a minus sign. You should know that only the financial abyss has no bottom. So it is in evaluating reforms.

                And in the assessment of the interlocutor - you completely randomly wrote me into the mouthpieces of “liberals and Russophobes”. If the rattle “liberal” can still have at least some positive meaning, then “Russophobe” (in Russia) is an undisguised enemy. It is interesting to me, would you personally shoot me or limit yourself to a denunciation?

                But I have ranked you among the host of "patriots." On this topic, some civilians even become statesmen. How Trotsky ... sad
    2. Rusich is not from Kiev
      Rusich is not from Kiev 20 November 2015 12: 06 New
      -1
      Quote: summer
      History of the Crimean War 53-56 poorly studied at school - alas, they did ... they played a campaign, sir ... But the Paris Peace Treaty of the 56th, then the war of 77-78. and, as a consequence of it, the San Stefano Peace and the subsequent renegade Berlin treatise of the Berlin Congress; the history of the creation, in particular, of the Kingdom of Romania (and, as evidence of “gratitude” in the future, the Romanian campaign of 1916-1917) would be a good lesson and a map of placing a rake on the field of history.

      Heh .. Why let me know you started this chain with the Crimean warriors? Are these your Wishlist?
      They didn’t shout, but lost, due to internal problems, first of all. At school, she is studied in the right volume for that time.
      Quote: summer
      The emphasis in the study of history should be shifted from pseudo-patriotic praise of the achievements and achievements of Russia to a balanced study of all, both positive and negative aspects of relationships

      Go, the American authorities teach how to study history, but it’s not clear to us. Svanidze was found here number two.
      1. summer
        summer 20 November 2015 17: 16 New
        0
        A young man, I graduated from high school a long time ago and may well be unaware of the momentary state of the history of the Fatherland. But.

        And in my time, and your snotty childhood, at school they taught strangers not to be rude and turn to “You”. Even to peers.
        Plus, you have not forgotten school history lessons. Now you have other concerns - to enter a university.

        They talked about people like you in Soviet times — it whistles like Trotsky. I think that you do not want to prefer to reckon with L.D. Bronstein.
        1. Rusich is not from Kiev
          Rusich is not from Kiev 20 November 2015 22: 39 New
          0
          Quote: summer
          And in my time, and your snotty childhood, at school they taught strangers not to be rude and turn to “You”. Even to peers.

          You mean you should not talk on the Internet or go to sites of your retirement age. Another time, other concepts. "About times, about morals." Do not remind when they wrote it?

          Quote: summer
          Plus, you have not forgotten school history lessons. Now you have other concerns - to enter a university.

          Your worries are to sit and husk the seeds, and not try to joke. Does not work.

          Quote: summer
          They talked about people like you in Soviet times — it whistles like Trotsky. I think that you do not want to prefer to reckon with L.D. Bronstein.

          In fact, is there anything that answers .ksperd? wassat In general, there are a lot of such unreasonable ones on Sait who believe that only their knowledge is true, but the knowledge itself is kept secret.
          1. summer
            summer 21 November 2015 00: 04 New
            0
            My dear, I have no desire to communicate with the boors ..


            Three in the morning. A visitor enters a half-empty bar,
            asks the bartender to pour one hundred grams of vodka.
            The bartender pours, the visitor takes out a measuring container from his pocket,
            pours vodka from a glass: 20 grams underfilling.
            He takes out the certificate from another pocket:
            “Test purchase! You’ve been fined ... "
            The bartender lazily throws 50 dollars through the counter.
            The next night, the story repeats itself exactly.
            On the third night, getting another 50 bucks,
            The examiner says with interest:
            “Listen, you already remember me, right?
            Why not pour me right so as not to pay money? ”
            Bartender (thoughtfully polishing a glass):
            “Here, I’ll be knocked down because of a fifty dollars!”


            Got it?

            In the future, contact the League of Sex Reforms.
            1. Rusich is not from Kiev
              Rusich is not from Kiev 22 November 2015 01: 17 New
              0
              Quote: summer
              Got it?

              In the future, contact the League of Sex Reforms.

              I have standards on this front, but Viagra wouldn’t have bothered you since I hadn’t gained life experience by a respectable age.
  13. Karlos
    Karlos 18 November 2015 17: 31 New
    +1
    As far as I know, the Kars agreement was signed for 25 years, the deadline has long expired. And one more thing: there is an arbitration award of the League of Nations (UN) regarding the Armenian-Turkish border, and it must be executed, because it, the decision, has no statute of limitations.
    1. Captain nemo
      Captain nemo 18 November 2015 19: 48 New
      0
      Quote: Karlos
      The Kars agreement was signed for 25 years;

      In this agreement, the terms, if you believe the Wikipedia, were not specified. But it is interesting that on the part of Turkey, the agreement was signed by the public organization "The Turkish Grand National Assembly" which does not have the right to conclude international treaties that the Turkish government had with its Foreign Ministry.
  14. Turkir
    Turkir 18 November 2015 17: 56 New
    +4
    Thanks to Kabardin for the article about the moments of the forgotten story.
    -------
    My grandfather fought in Kars, in the First World War.
    1. Karlos
      Karlos 18 November 2015 19: 33 New
      +1
      And my grandfather comes from there
  15. Truth-lovers
    Truth-lovers 19 November 2015 20: 32 New
    -1
    Quote: Vasily50
    For this, we can only thank the Nazis of Transcaucasia, both Armenian and Georgian. At the beginning of the 20th century, Armenian and Georgian nationalists massacred the neighbors and, having received a rebuff, were very dissatisfied with the results, and at the end of the last century they again tried to destroy the neighbors, received a rebuff and now require the * world * community to resolve the issue in their favor *.
    The position of the Georgian church towards * non-Georgians * and especially towards the RUSSIANs is indicative. The appeals of the Georgian * Pope * against RUSSIAN are also indicative.

    Actually, the ROC and the patriarch Kirill have exactly the same strange position with respect to the ORTHODOX Georgians! I’m already silent that Russia is almost against and brothers in faith and is fighting, modern Syria is out of line.

    Quote: Pissarro
    The enemy took the price of the incredible long-term efforts of the half of the city of Sevastopol, with the complete success of the Russians in the Caucasus with the capture of Kars and the complete defeat of the enemy in Kamchatka, the failure of attacks in the Baltic and the North. There was only one reason for peace with the adversary, who died in the opinion of Europe and was not inclined to compromises. And the heiress was rotten, suffered liberalism, began his reign with a stupid peace treaty, sold Alaska later and in the end received an absolutely deserved bomb

    1.Allies did not wage a global war against the Russian Empire. And to put it mildly, the tsarist army under Nicholas I is at times more than even under Alexander I. 2.Economy was in the collasp - not only from the war, but LONG BEFORE IT. It’s just that war catalyzed the degradation of the economy in all areas. 3. If Alaska weren’t sold, trying to raise money for investments (no one wanted to invest in such a country then, as now, thank God the emperors managed to fix it), then the United States would have taken it simply by force and free of charge (such as colonies from Spain ) And we acted cleverly, like France, in time to sell its possessions in North America.
    1. Basil50
      Basil50 19 November 2015 22: 11 New
      +1
      ORTHODOXY and church are different concepts. Let the Georgian church solve its problems with other churches, no one gets into these relations. But here are the statements * of the Georgian pope * on his own behalf and on behalf of his church to know and remember necessarily. As well as the fact that the Georgians started the war 08.08.08/XNUMX/XNUMX. with betrayal and treachery. And so far, no one in Georgia has wanted to condemn war criminals.
    2. Pissarro
      Pissarro 20 November 2015 13: 15 New
      0
      The allies waged war against Russia in the Far East, the Caucasus, the Baltic, the North Sea, the Balkans. This is called global war. They dragged all trash from all over the world, from the Sardinians to the Zouaves. This is also called the global war against Russia. Diplomatically strained Austrians who fettered the 200 thousandth Russian army in the West with their hostile position. And there were beats everywhere, except for occupying half of the city of Sevastopol as a result of a long war.

      And on the account of the correctness of the trade in their land mastered by their ancestors, this position is popular in certain handshake circles, are you there? laughing

      It is ridiculous to compare the strength of the US Army of the 19th century with the Russian Army, then the US Army could only make a cavalry raid on an Indian village with unsuccessful success laughing
      1. summer
        summer 20 November 2015 17: 28 New
        0
        Sergey, I think that the Indians in America gave the European colonialists a much more powerful rebuff than Russia could have had the USA in Alaska. The result is obvious. Moreover, Russia did not have enough money, not only for the war in America, but even for the simple maintenance of the administration on "poor and unpromising" lands. A classic suitcase without a handle.

        Moreover, at the time of the sale of Alaska, the United States had fresh experience of a “many-year siege” .. of the war and the capture of numerous “Sevastopol”. America did not experience a lack in pros. And the fact that pin-dos are easy to climb, they demonstrated after some 30 years, when the whole world was blown up to master the gold of Alaska.

        Do not judge the predecessors from the height of history. “If I were yesterday as smart as my Sarah later.” Of the two of you - you and Alexander II, it is the latter I would not dare to call "historical pygmy."
        1. Pissarro
          Pissarro 20 November 2015 20: 19 New
          0
          You be careful, I answered Pravdodlyubovu, and not to you, his idea of ​​acquiring allies through the distribution of land

          But they are touched by a “liberator” darling who undermined the stability of the father’s autocracy, destroyed the lands that had been mastered by the ancestors and ended the bomb, which had flown from the generated mess, and did not intend only because the official position required it. it will perpetuate Grozny, which has doubled the land of Russia and, in essence, created autocracy. It is evident because it is easier to sell the Motherland than to acquire
          1. summer
            summer 20 November 2015 21: 49 New
            0
            Sergey, you started a dispute with me November 18, 2015 23: 56 ... stop

            I will continue to be more attentive, although you did not directly address anyone specifically, and your arguments easily fit into the context of our conversation with you. (Your post lies after the post "Vasily50", if that ..).

            I agree with you in the promises - "they will be touched .. I do not intend only because the official position requires it" and that Alexander "did not consider it necessary to immortalize Grozny on it." I agree with these positions, but I still didn’t sell the lands of A II and, it seems to me, the development of food-terrorism in Russia was not a direct consequence of the Tsar-Liberator’s reforms, but rather a reaction from a foreign-inspired reaction to a possible renewal and strengthening Russian state. The "partners" already tried to throw a reins (although when they did not try? Paul I, at least, an analogue of Beria at the turn of the nineteenth century) on Russia.

            I am not an expert on the history of Russia, but I have long been interested in the question about Catherine, that "was wrong." I, nevertheless, try to take the place of the king (but without the attributes of power, essno yes ) at that time and in those conditions. And I find excuses for him.

            Generally speaking, autocracy in front of the other forms of government prevails in only one, but the most important thing. An autocrat, mistaken, punishes himself first of all. And in these conditions, all the more so, being surrounded by the yard, he makes the most informed decisions. In theory.

            You beloved Nicholas I began a conflict in the 53rd with Turkey recklessly. He did worse than a crime - he made a mistake - as the great Talleyrand (or the great Foucher) said in another context what ).

            With respect to you for reducing the degree of conversation.
  16. Truth-lovers
    Truth-lovers 20 November 2015 19: 16 New
    -1
    Quote: Vasily50
    ORTHODOXY and church are different concepts. Let the Georgian church solve its problems with other churches, no one gets into these relations. But here are the statements * of the Georgian pope * on his own behalf and on behalf of his church to know and remember necessarily. As well as the fact that the Georgians started the war 08.08.08/XNUMX/XNUMX. with betrayal and treachery.
    We will not talk about the Georgian War of 2008, here we are talking about the fact that the Russian Federation is constantly at war with Christian peoples more often than with Muslims, but IMHO is wrong.

    Quote: Pissarro
    They dragged all kinds of trash from all over the world, from the Sardinians to the Zouaves. This is also called the global war against Russia. Diplomatically strained the Austrians, who fettered the 200 thousandth Russian army in the West with their hostile position.

    I agree, hostilities were fought all over the world, but on the whole, the purpose of the allies was neither the destruction of RI, nor even the change of dynasty; the goal was, firstly, to save Turkey from destruction, and secondly, to “force peace” that had forgotten about the world standards of the imperial empire.

    Quote: Pissarro
    It is ridiculous to compare the strength of the 19th-century US army with the Russian army
    Well, yes, the Spaniards also thought so ... The Philippines, part of Mexico, Cuba, became under US rule. And Spain was still grateful to them for stopping at just that! Russia, however, only wondered by selling the North American colonies, for it received serious investments for the economy and a strong ally ALMOST FOR A HUNDRED YEARS until the 1940s. (By the way, this could also be done in the case of Japan - because in the event of the concession of part of the territories instead of the constantly threatening Cerberus, we would have got a very reliable ally in the fight against China and the USA, a bunch of investments and technologies).
    1. Pissarro
      Pissarro 20 November 2015 20: 15 New
      0
      Sorry, but acquiring allies by distributing land is, in my opinion, the wildest option. Allies gain a common interest, not distribution of land. America was not an ally of Russia until the 1940s, America supported the Japanese in the first Russian-Japanese, and in our civilian it was openly idle in the Far The East, and indeed had no diplomatic relations with us until 1930, is such an ally
    2. Stanislas
      Stanislas 20 November 2015 20: 59 New
      +2
      Quote: True-Loving
      The Russian Federation is constantly at war with Christian peoples more often than with Muslims, but IMHO is wrong.
      Pass on to those “Christian peoples” so that they don’t come to us, and everything will be fine with them.
  17. Truth-lovers
    Truth-lovers 20 November 2015 23: 04 New
    -2
    Quote: Pissarro
    Allies gain common interests, not land distribution.

    Not always. And to get a stable ally, an excellent counterweight to China and the United States, with excellent investments and supertechnologies, instead of the US chain dog, on which Japan relies in the confrontation of the Russian Federation, for the sake of a few pieces of land is a good option (I remind you that Japan does not ask even half of its former possessions in Dal.Vostok).

    Quote: Pissarro
    . America was not an ally of Russia until 1940, America supported the Japanese in the first Russian-Japanese,
    Is it really so? Just the same it was and supported in many ways. But in Russian-Japanese, she took a NEUTRAL emphasized position, because if she REALLY helped Japan, then help God of Russia then - if the Japanese had not reached the Urals, then to Novosibirsk for sure. But no, the Yankees were against the hegemony of anyone in the Pacific.

    Quote: Pissarro
    had no diplomatic relations with us until 1930, such an ally
    Yes, only since the 20s it has been trading with SovRussia without any problems and in every possible way has been in contact with the Communists, despite all the demagogy. And already from the end of the 20s-beginning of the 30s so in full. And how many military technologies the Americans transferred, "that Mama Do not Cry" (for reference, the well-known SB bomber, for example, at least).

    Quote: Stanislav
    Pass on to those “Christian peoples” so that they don’t come to us, and everything will be fine with them.
    And why in quotation marks? To my great regret, my country just climbs to them ...
    1. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 04: 38 New
      +1
      How the Japanese supposedly reached Novosibirsk was shown by the defense of Port Arthur. At this pace, people would definitely not have had enough for a “campaign”.
  18. Truth-lovers
    Truth-lovers 22 November 2015 14: 04 New
    0
    Quote: cast iron
    How the Japanese supposedly reached Novosibirsk was shown by the defense of Port Arthur.
    The Japanese did not consider people in the same way as the Soviet generals. So to them it is no problem. You’re particularly smart about this, tell me, where would it be in Siberia in the beginning of the 20th century that there would be at least one fortress as technically equipped as Port Arthur? And if the United States suddenly violated its neutrality and really helped Japan against the Republic of Ingushetia not only by the fleet, but also by troops and equipment?!? In fact, they occupied Primorye without special strains in the Civil; this is 15 years after the Russo-Japanese one.
    1. cast iron
      cast iron 22 November 2015 20: 05 New
      0
      Your opuses say about the level of your competence)) To compare the army of 1904 with the decomposed destroyed army of the Civil War in 15 years is evident from great intelligence and quick wits. I’m saying that you are a cheap anti-Soviet propagandist who grew up on the publications of the liberoid magazine “Spark” of the sample from the late 1980s and early 1990s.