Military Review

Civil War 1918-1923: number of parties involved

50



When considering the phenomenon of the Civil War in Russia 1917-1923. very often you can come across a simplistic view, according to which there were only two warring parties: the “red” and the “white”. In fact, everything is somewhat more complicated. In reality, at least six parties took part in the war, each of which pursued its own interests.

What were these parties, what interests did they represent, and what would be the fate of Russia if these parties won? Consider this question in more detail.

1. Red For the working people!

The first party on the right of the winner can be called "red". In itself, the red movement was not entirely homogeneous, but of all the belligerents, it was this attribute — relative homogeneity — that was inherent to them to the greatest extent. The Red Army represented the interests of the legitimate power at that time, namely, the state structures that emerged after the October Revolution 1917. To call this power “Bolshevik” is not quite right, since at that time, the Bolsheviks and the Left Social Revolutionaries were essentially a united front. If desired, a significant number of Left Social Revolutionaries can be found both in leading positions in the state apparatus, and in command (and line) positions in the Red Army (not to mention the earlier Red Guard). However, a similar desire arose later in the party leadership, and those of the Left Social Revolutionaries who did not have time or (due to short-sightedness) did not fundamentally go to the camp of the CPSU (b), suffered a sad fate. But it is beyond the scope of our material, because refers to the period after the end of the Civil. Returning to the red side, one can say that it is their cohesion (the absence of serious internal contradictions, the unified strategic view and unity of command) and legitimacy (and, as a result, the possibility of holding mass appeals) in the end and brought them victory.

2. White. For faith, the king ... or the Constituent Assembly? Or Directory? Or…

The second side of the conflict can surely be called what has been called the "whites". In fact, the White Guard as such, unlike the Reds, was not a uniform movement. Everyone remembers the scene from the movie “The Elusive Avengers”, when one of the characters utters a monarchist statement in a restaurant filled with representatives of the White movement? Immediately after this statement, a scuffle begins in the restaurant, caused by a difference in the political views of the public. There are shouts of “Long live the Constituent Assembly!”, “Long live the Free Republic!”, Etc. The White movement really did not have a single political program and any long-term goals, and the unifying idea was the idea of ​​defeating the Reds. There is an opinion that in the case of (unlikely) White’s military victory in the form in which they wanted it (ie the overthrow of the government of Lenin), the Civil War would have lasted more than a decade, for lovers and connoisseurs of “Schubert’s waltzes and crunches French loaves ”would immediately grab the“ fair seekers ”with their idea of ​​the Constituent Assembly, which, in turn, would gladly“ tickle ”the supporters of the military dictatorship a la Kolchak, who had a political allergy on the French buns under Schubert.

3. Green Bay whites until they turn red, beat red ones until they turn black, and at the same time rob the loot

The third side of the conflict, which is now remembered only by experts and a few enthusiasts of the topic, is the force for which war, especially civil, is a real breeding ground. This refers to the "rats of war" - various gangs, the whole point of which is essentially a matter of armed robbery of the civilian population. Tellingly, in that war these “rats” divorced so much that they even got their color, like the two main sides. Since the main part of these “rats” was army deserters (who wore uniforms), and their main habitat was extensive forests, they were called “green”. Usually, the greens had no ideology other than the slogan of “expropriating the expropriated” (and often just expropriating everything that can be reached), with the exception of the Makhnovist movement, which gave its activities the ideological basis of anarchism. There are cases of cooperation of the green with other parties - both with the red (by the middle of 1919, the armed forces of the Soviet Republic had the name "Workers 'and Peasants' Red-Green Army") and with the whites. It is worth mentioning again Makhno with the well-known phrase “Beat the whites until they turn red, beat the reds until they turn black.” Makhno had a flag of BLACK color, despite the character’s belonging to the green movement. In addition to Makhno, if you wish, you can recall about a dozen field commanders of green. Tellingly, most of them were active in Ukraine, and nowhere else.

4. Separatists of all stripes. Emir Akbar of Bukhara and Ukraine in one bottle

Unlike the greens, this category of citizens very much had an ideological basis, and a single one — a nationalist one. Naturally, the first representatives of this force were citizens living in Poland and Finland, and after them - carriers of the ideas of “Ukrainians”, carefully thought out by the Austro-Hungarians, who most often do not even know the Ukrainian language. This movement in Ukraine reached such an epic intensity that it did not even manage to organize into something whole, and it existed in the form of two groups - UNR and ZUNR, and if the former were at least somehow negotiable, the latter were different from the green ones like Djebhat an -Nusra (prohibited on the territory of the Russian Federation) from ISIS (prohibited on the territory of the Russian Federation), that is, just a little differently ideologically smelled, and the heads of the civilian population were cut in the same way. Somewhat later (when Turkey came to life after the British campaign on the BV), citizens of this category appeared in Central Asia, and their ideology was closer to green. But still they had their ideological basis (what is now called religious extremism). The fate of all these citizens is the same - the Red Army has come and reconciled all. With fate.

5. Entente. God Save the Queen in the name of Mikado

Do not forget that the Civil War was essentially a part of the First World War - in any case, it coincided in time. Fighting means the Entente with the Tripartite, and here bam is a revolution in the largest power of the Entente. Naturally, the rest of the Entente has a number of legitimate questions, the first of which is “Why not bite off?” And they decided to bite off. If you believe that the Entente was solely on the side of the Whites, then you are deeply mistaken - she was on her side, and the troops of the Entente, like the other parties, fought against all the others, and did not support one of the above forces. The real help of the Entente to the white was only in the supply of military material assets, primarily uniforms and food (not even weapons and ammunition). The fact is that until the end of the Civil War, the leadership of the Entente countries did not determine which of the shades of white is more legitimate and who specifically (Kolchak? Yudenich? Denikin? Wrangel? Ungern?) Should be really supported militarily. As a result, the troops of the Entente were represented during the war, let's say, by limited expeditionary contingents, which behaved exactly the same as the greens, but wore a foreign uniform and insignia.

6. Germany and sided (bayonet to the rifle) Austria-Hungary. Gott mit ...

Continuing the theme of the First World War. Germany unexpectedly (and perhaps expectedly: rumors about the financing of a number of political forces in Russia of that period are different) discovered that the enemy’s forces on the Eastern Front for some reason deserted en masse, and the new government of Russia is very eager to make peace and leave the adventure First World. Peace was soon concluded, and the German troops occupied the territories occupied by citizens from n. 4. True, not for long. Nevertheless, they managed to celebrate the fighting almost all of the above forces.

And after all, what is characteristic is that this state of affairs, namely the multitude of warring parties, always takes shape during any civil war, and not just the war of 1917-23.
Author:
50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Griboedoff
    Griboedoff 21 January 2016 06: 29
    20
    The topic is interesting, but something is too short. Why is there no more detailed decomposition of the white movement, but only a mention of some of its leaders? Why is the topic of the participation of foreign states not more fully disclosed? Japan alone inherited how much in that period in Russia. Again, more could be said about the separatists.
    1. Army soldier2
      Army soldier2 21 January 2016 09: 30
      13
      I agree, the topic is really interesting. Only filed at the essay level of a student of the 8 class (maybe it is so?)
      By the way, Japan, which for several years occupied Primorye, does not apply to either 5 or 6 points.
      1. Sergey7311
        Sergey7311 22 January 2016 04: 27
        +2
        By the way, there was still such a state entity as the Far Eastern Republic - the Far Eastern Republic. Buffer state on the border of the USSR and China. Created for subsequent entry into the USSR.
    2. Oorfene Deuce
      Oorfene Deuce 21 January 2016 13: 19
      +9
      Really ... The author raised an interesting topic (+). But somehow briefly. Just accelerated and ... Bam! The end
      Baron Ungern-Sternberg was generally a tear-off, with his eastern esoteric philosophy. I think that also does not fit into either white, or green, or into another classification.
  2. V.ic
    V.ic 21 January 2016 06: 41
    +8
    Short and not interesting. At the EG level. Rating: not satisfactory. Where does the author take the atamans Semyonov, Kalmykov, the Kronstadt sailors, the peasants of the Tambov region, the "fork" uprising in the Ufa province?
    1. soldner
      soldner 21 January 2016 07: 55
      +2
      Do not confuse, please. Kronstadt and the Tambov uprising - this is after the end of the Civil War in the European part of Russia.
      1. shasherin.pavel
        shasherin.pavel 23 January 2016 10: 20
        0
        Quote: soldner
        Tambov uprising - this is after the end of the Civil War

        Where did you take the end of the Civil War?
    2. Riv
      Riv 21 January 2016 08: 17
      13
      Kronstadt is essentially an intra-factional showdown among the Reds. The anarchists decided that the Bolsheviks were leading the country "in the wrong place." At the same time, they themselves did not really know "where". Actually, therefore, the rebellion did not spread. Even among the sailors of Kronstadt itself, not everyone joined him, and the anarchist detachments (for example, the detachment of Zheleznyak, the same one), both fought with the whites, and continued. Subsequently, Stalin, while cleaning out the Trotskyists and the remnants of the Socialist-Revolutionaries, did not pay special attention to the former anarchists. Have you seen the movie "The Bronze Bird"? There, in the village, an anarchist-maximalist lives quietly and no one touches him, he even makes out a pioneer club ... :)

      The Tambov uprising (like the "fork" uprising, by the way) is the reaction of the peasants to the war communism. That is, it, even with the presence of White Guard and Nazinalist elements in the leadership, was directed against the internal policy of the Bolsheviks, and not against the socialist system itself. Moreover, it cannot be said that it was sterile. NEP - including its consequence. In short: the peasants wanted to be left alone.

      Semenov ... Well, this is a bandit, no doubt.
  3. Glot
    Glot 21 January 2016 07: 09
    +5
    Yes, everything is much, much more complicated. And not six, and not seven or ten sides conflicted.
    There, only the "white" could not agree among themselves what exactly they want and which way to go. Actually, this is one of the reasons, and serious reasons for their defeat - total disunity.
    And as for Makhno, you can't fit in two lines there either. And the slogan was rather "For Soviets without Bolsheviks." It was he already at the end, when he realized that there were some enemies around him, he began to beat everyone to the right and to the left, sliding down to a banal bandit, and before that everything was different.
    In general, a very superficial look in the article. But, the history of the Civil and a thousand articles does not fit. So that ...
  4. qwert
    qwert 21 January 2016 07: 15
    +2
    Quote: Glot
    Yes, everything is much, much more complicated. And not six, and not seven or ten sides conflicted.

    The author simply divided them into large groups. Well, he will not list every gang from the "green" there must have been several hundred of them.
  5. Korsar4
    Korsar4 21 January 2016 07: 18
    +3
    It turns out that I read "R. V.S." - and immediately became a specialist.
    1. soldner
      soldner 21 January 2016 08: 09
      +8
      Yes, the author knows the story poorly. In general, science classifies Aetanta, Germany, Austria-Hungary, USA, Japan as "foreign intervention". It is a mistake to think that the Entente troops did not fight against the Reds. They fought actively or passively, another question. After the end of the First World War, the soldiers already wanted to go home. But, for example, the Czechoslovak corps, an active participant in the war, was officially considered part of the French army. It was the Czechs who actually unleashed the intervention, starting to smash Soviet power in the Urals. For this, grateful Russians erected a monument to them in Chelyabinsk. Only the Russians can do this: erect a monument to the robber interventionists who betrayed Admiral Kolchak, shot and hanged the Russians, and even stole part of the gold reserve of the Russian Empire!
      1. Thunderbolt
        Thunderbolt 21 January 2016 08: 41
        +2
        Quote: soldner
        erected a monument to them in Chelyabinsk.
        Not only Chelyabinsk, that's what is happening with me.http://samara.ru/read/86098What a shame. Or the fact that the white whales fought against the Bolsheviks makes them heroes?
      2. V.ic
        V.ic 21 January 2016 18: 06
        +3
        Quote: soldner
        For this, grateful Russians erected a monument to them in Chelyabinsk.

        You know, even a monument to EBNu was erected in the "E" burg.
  6. semirek
    semirek 21 January 2016 07: 54
    +3
    The theme of the civil war is very delicate matter, in Soviet times, it was described simply in a history textbook: white enemies, red for the working people. The author did not bother, took the main points from there. The author did not know what the Bolsheviks called until the end of the twenties things in their own names: the term October revolution didn’t exist --- there was an October revolution. The revolution implies spontaneous action of the masses of people to overthrow the existing government - this was in February 17th, as a result of which two power structures appeared: an interim government (temporary after which elections were expected and the convocation of the Constituent Assembly to decide on the form of governing the country) and the Petrograd Soviet, these structures alternately fought with each other - the result of this was the seizure by the Bolsheviks, headed by Lenin and Trotsky, of the residence of the Provisional Government of the Winter Palace, where are the jubilant masses and signs of revolution? signs of counter-revolution, the Bolsheviks did not receive a significant percentage of votes in the elections They say that the Constituent Assembly is like a bone in the throat - accordingly, the dispersal of this legal body at the beginning of the 18th century, usurping power, outlawing a huge part of the population. Here are the signs of a civil war.
    1. Chtononibrator
      Chtononibrator 21 January 2016 14: 35
      0
      The question of the legitimacy of the interim is still a problem. About the masses of the people in February is also debatable.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 21 January 2016 16: 23
      +4
      The author was not aware that, until the end of the twenties, the Bolsheviks called things by their proper names: the term October Revolution did not exist --- there was an October revolution.

      Rebellion cannot end in luck, -
      Otherwise, his name is different.

      (c) Robert Burns (translated by Marshak)
      Quote: semirek
      On the contrary, all the signs of the counter-revolution, the Bolsheviks did not receive a significant percentage of the vote in the election, therefore, the Constituent Assembly as a bone in their throat is, accordingly, the dispersal of this legal body at the beginning of 18th, usurping power, outlawing a huge part of the population.

      Yeah ... some usurpers took power from others. The problem of October is that the Provisional Government did not have power as such at the end of August.
      Can a government be considered power that does not control the fleet’s base, located in direct line of sight from the capital, and the fleet itself?
      Can a government be considered power that cannot find the units loyal to it to suppress one rebel division - and is forced to ask its irreconcilable opponents to use its Guard for this?
      Is it possible to consider the government as the government, which already by the middle of summer actually lost control of Ukraine - local nationalists ruled there, simply ignoring representatives of the central government.
      By October, the area of ​​control of the Temporary workers ended behind the gates of the Winter Palace. smile
      1. 2news
        2news 21 January 2016 16: 45
        -1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        By October, the area of ​​control of the Temporary workers ended behind the gates of the Winter Palace.

        Do not read Bolshevik newspapers before breakfast. It’s all the same there is nothing but lies.
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Can a government be considered power that cannot find the units loyal to it to suppress one rebel division - and is forced to ask its irreconcilable opponents to use its Guard for this?

        Do you consider real power only the one that hangs people on lampposts?
        And the fact that in the "time of troubles" there is unrest is natural. It is a great pity that Kerensky's Bonapartism did not develop into a dictatorship. In this case, the country would go forward, without going back. And so, in essence, the Bolshevik coup in January 1918. was the restoration of feudalism in the country. With a different sauce, but nonetheless. The country did not break free from its shackles, did not move to the next OEF.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 21 January 2016 19: 16
          0
          Quote: 2news
          Do not read Bolshevik newspapers before breakfast. It’s all the same there is nothing but lies.

          That is, the situation when the cruiser of the Baltic Fleet becomes in the position for firing at the residence legitimate governmentand the Minister of the Sea can only look at it from the window - this means that government controls its military?
          I'm not talking about the landing of the Central Balta in the capital. And about the position of the garrison of the Peter and Paul Fortress, located exactly opposite the Winter Palace. smile
          Quote: 2news
          Do you consider real power only the one that hangs people on lampposts?

          He-he-he ... but don't you remind me - what "Bonapartik" called for the return of the death penalty at the front? And who was at the head of the Provisional Government (as well as the Minister of War and the Navy) when she was returned on July 12?
          It was only when it came to the point that it became clear that there was nothing for the authorities to fulfill their threats.
          - You are arrested!
          - Do you have a pistol?
          - Then detained ...

          Quote: 2news
          It is unfortunate that Kerensky’s Bonapartism did not develop into a dictatorship. In this case, the country would go forward, without going back.

          She wouldn’t go anywhere. Because a dictatorship is possible only with the right bayonets. But Kerensky did not have such.
          At that time, the bayonets generally preferred to go home. Moreover, along with weapons. Do you remember Bulgakov?
          There were tens of thousands of people who returned from the war and were able to shoot ...

          “But the officers themselves learned by order of their superiors!”

          Hundreds of thousands of rifles buried in the ground, hidden in clams and lockers and not surrendered, despite the German military courts coming fast, flogging and shrapnel firing, millions of rounds in the same land, and three-inch guns in every fifth village, and machine guns in every second, in every small town warehouses of shells, arsenals with overcoats and hats.

          And in these same towns, teachers, paramedics, classmates, Ukrainian seminarians who, by the will of fate, became ensigns, the hefty sons of beekeepers, captains with Ukrainian surnames ... everyone speaks Ukrainian, everyone loves a magical, imagined Ukraine, without lords, without lords Moscale officers, and thousands of former Ukrainian prisoners who returned from Galicia.
          1. 2news
            2news 21 January 2016 19: 48
            -1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Does this mean that the government controls its military?

            The Baltic Fleet cruiser (where did you see the fleet there?) Is nothing. At the level of dirt from under the nails. And it was possible to call Aurora a cruiser only because of poverty. Aurora has never been a cruiser from birth, at most a stationary. Just rioters. Even the battleship Potemkin was a much more serious force than the entire "fleet". The real Baltic Fleet vanished in Tsushima. And these were wartime hicks.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            I'm not talking about the landing of the Central Balta in the capital. And about the position of the garrison of the Peter and Paul Fortress, located exactly opposite the Winter Palace.

            I repeat to you once again, the amount of coup force does not mean that they are not coup.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            It was only when it came to the point that it became clear that there was nothing for the authorities to fulfill their threats.

            Nothing. The Bolsheviks found strength. And they executed on a large scale. From this they are no longer coup, but a legitimate authority?
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Because a dictatorship is possible only with the right bayonets. But Kerensky did not have such.

            But this is very sad. But he could not afford to promise the lumpen factory, newspaper, ship, land and landowner daughters. Like some bald and burry. Therefore, he lost. But not he, and not so much he, but Russia as a whole lost. Lost the very ones that went home. They were caught up. Bolsheviks. And after that, they no longer seemed to them. Hair on the ass, I guess, then tore, but it was too late.
            1. Mr. Pip
              Mr. Pip 21 January 2016 20: 54
              0
              Quote: 2news
              But this is very sad. But he could not afford to promise the lumpen factory, newspaper, ship, land and landowner daughters.

              And it was not necessary! It was not the lumpen who "voted" for the Bolsheviks, but the "soldiers", to be more precise, those "soldiers" to whom "Kerensky and Co." gave freedom of will and choice! fellow
              1. 2news
                2news 21 January 2016 21: 08
                +1
                Quote: Mr. PIP
                It was not the lumpen who "voted" for the Bolsheviks, but the "soldiers", to be more precise, those "soldiers" to whom Kerensky and Co. gave freedom of will and choice

                The soldiers did not "vote" for the Bolsheviks. The soldiers went home. There are lumpen left. who had nowhere to go, and all sorts of foreigners. Latvian arrows, for example. So they muddied the water in the capital of Russia.
                Why not muddle? A foreign country, in fact. No pity.
                1. Mr. Pip
                  Mr. Pip 21 January 2016 21: 32
                  0
                  Quote: 2news
                  The soldiers went home.

                  Yeah. Pray and fast - then there were spiritual soldiers laughing
                  Quote: 2news
                  Lumpen remained.

                  But didn’t soldiers take lumpens in RI? Especially in the WWI? laughing
                  Quote: 2news
                  Latvian arrows, for example. So they stirred up water in the capital of Russia.

                  Well, the stump "Latvian arrows" is clear! Who else could have ruined the Great Russian Empire and personally the "Russian Bonaparte" Kerensky if not the "Latvian arrows" laughing
                  1. 2news
                    2news 21 January 2016 21: 56
                    +1
                    Quote: Mr. PIP
                    Yeah. Pray and fast - then there were spiritual soldiers

                    Those. nothing to say. Smile and wave.
                    Quote: Mr. PIP
                    But didn’t soldiers take lumpens in RI? Especially in the WWI

                    And again we smile and wave. Will you smile and wave for a long time?
                    Quote: Mr. PIP
                    Who else could have ruined the Great Russian Empire and personally the "Russian Bonaparte" Kerensky, if not the "Latvian arrows"

                    Including There, besides them, there was enough scumbag.
                    1. Mr. Pip
                      Mr. Pip 21 January 2016 22: 03
                      +1
                      Quote: 2news
                      Smile and wave.

                      Well, yes, discussing with the troll only this remains - in your world, soldiers in Ingushetia were entirely strictly non-drinking intellectuals who did not succumb to provocations, and the Bolsheviks brought the "revolutionary rabble" from "other countries" - from Latvia a pancake !!! wassat laughing good
                      Although the question of what under Kerensky did the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Ingushetia still remains open! fellow
                      1. 2news
                        2news 21 January 2016 22: 11
                        +1
                        Quote: Mr. PIP
                        and the "revolutionary rabble" the Bolsheviks brought from "other countries" - from Latvia damn

                        Do not distort. I did not write this.
                        Quote: Mr. PIP
                        in your own world, soldiers in the Republic of Ingushetia were completely strictly not drinking intellectuals, not amenable to provocations

                        And again, do not distort. And I did not write this.
                        Quote: Mr. PIP
                        Although the question of what under Kerensky did the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Ingushetia still remains open!

                        So solve it. Without me.
            2. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 22 January 2016 11: 09
              +1
              Quote: 2news
              The Baltic Fleet cruiser (and where did you see the fleet there?) Is nothing. At the level of dirt from under the nails. Yes, and Aurora could be called a cruiser only by poverty. Aurora and from birth a cruiser has never been, a maximum inpatient. Just rioters.

              From birth, "Aurora" was still a cruiser. At the level of some "astrea" or "talbot".
              And as for the "simple rioters" ... when the Emperor was thrown off by the Provisionalists, the entire Black Sea Fleet came out on board the Potemkin (despite all the revolutionary ferment) to hunt for rioters. What do we see in 1917? Where are the faithful legitimate government forces rushing to suppress the riot? And, here from the direction of Kronstadt ships appeared ... but what is it? The destroyers disembark the troops and stand next to the Aurora. A training and artillery ship
              Most of the BF was frankly about everything "get it, get it". And the smaller, active one, on whose help the opposing sides could count, supported the Soviets. Even the old "Emperor Alexander II" reached Peter.
              And most importantly - on the BF, everything was steered by the Centrobalt. Not a minister of the sea. Not the army command, to which the fleet was reassigned to the beginning of the war. Not some other government structure. And the Central Committee of the Baltic Fleet, which since September 19 has not officially recognized the Temporary workers. AND legitimate government worn out.
              But the "damned usurpers", as soon as it seemed to them that Tsentrobalt might not fulfill their orders for organizing the Ice Campaign, they immediately appointed their commissars to it, and after a couple of weeks it was dismissed altogether.
              Quote: 2news
              I repeat to you once again, the amount of coup force does not mean that they are not coup.

              And what does the number of power forces speak about? How many did Kerensky bring with him to Petrograd at the end of October 1917? And this despite the fact that under his banner gathered not only supporters of the legitimate government, but simply all opponents of the Soviets - including those who dreamed of seeing Kerensky himself on the lantern as a festive decoration. The latter were generally in the majority there, for the basis of Kerensky's forces was Krasnov's "Kornilov" corps. Yes, yes, the same corps that followed Kornilov to Petrograd in August. An enchanting picture: the head of a legitimate government goes to the capital at the head of those from whom he was fleeing 2 months ago with the help of the Soviets.
              And the regular army in the person of the headquarters of the Northern Front simply sent Kerensky, without giving him a single division to suppress the coup. However, as last time, in February - with Nikolai. How it comes around - it will respond: overthrown the emperor received the same measure.
              1. 2news
                2news 22 January 2016 11: 43
                0
                Quote: Alexey RA
                From birth, "Aurora" was still a cruiser. At the level of some "astrea" or "talbot".

                Nope. Talbot (Eclipse) and the Astrea were the fighter cruisers of the trade. And the Diana (Aurora) were stationary cruisers. That part of them, which was called "colonial cruisers". They were not specially built like that, where did Russia get the overseas colonies? They just turned out that way. By chance. Well, that was the technological level at the time.
                Diana had nothing to do with eclipses. Although their dimensions, speed and weapons were similar. Actually, Diana was built in their image and likeness. But they couldn’t.
                Quote: Alexey RA
                And what do we see in 1917? Where are the forces loyal to the legitimate government, rushing to suppress rebellion?

                And who liquidated the Kornilov rebellion and arrested the entire top of the rebellion? Grandpa Fir?
                Quote: Alexey RA
                But the "damned usurpers", as soon as it seemed to them that Tsentrobalt might not fulfill their orders to organize the Ice Campaign, they immediately appointed their commissars to it

                I don’t understand you. Did they stop being putschists and bandits from this? And then, since when is the passion for executions a sign of "good power"?
                Quote: Alexey RA
                How many did Kerensky bring with him to Petrograd at the end of October 1917?

                So what? And for what? because the Bolsheviks in early November declared what? The fact that they are temporarily, until January 1918. Therefore, no one twitched, no one was interested in these couple of months. But the Bolsheviks simply deceived everyone. And they committed an armed seizure of power. In January 1918 already completely.
                Quote: Alexey RA
                As he comes around, he will respond: those who overthrew the emperor received the same measure.

                Actually, Nicholas himself denied. He did everything correctly and in a timely manner. Only here before the Bolsheviks did not shoot. As a result, what happened happened.
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 22 January 2016 13: 04
                  0
                  Quote: 2news
                  To Diana's Eclipses had nothing to do. Although their dimensions, speed and weapons were similar. Actually, Diana built in their image and likeness. But they couldn’t.

                  You do not see some contradiction? wink
                  "Sleepy goddesses" were built according to TK on steel, high-speed, armored ocean cruiser - trade fighter.
                  Quote: 2news
                  And who liquidated the Kornilov rebellion and arrested the entire top of the rebellion? Grandpa Fir?

                  Kornilov surrendered to Alekseev after his forces were propagandized by Bolshevik agitators. Which were sent at the request of the Temporary workers.
                  Oh yes, the same Temporary Workers at the approach of Kornilov began to distribute weapons to the workers who formed the Red Guard. Think about it: the government, instead of relying on the army, police and special services subordinate to it, is arming the militants of its main rival. And this is with the approach of just one division.
                  Quote: 2news
                  I don’t understand something. Are they from this ceased to be putschists and bandits?

                  From this they became power. Which is able to ensure compliance with its instructions.
                  Power must govern. It was she, and not the Central Balts, Vikzheli and other illegal bodies. And the Provisional Government did not control anything.
                  Quote: 2news
                  Actually, Nicholas himself denied.

                  Yeah ... first, Alekseev demanded to actually transfer the leadership of the State Duma, which trying to establish a possible order... Then he was supported by Brusilov. Then Ruzsky, in whose headquarters Nikolai was, entered into negotiations with Rodzianko. And when Nicholas decided to find out the opinion of the commanders of the fronts and fleets about the abdication - all those who answered his telegrams unanimously sent the emperor to abdicate. Only the cautious Kolchak portrayed Nelson, "holding a pipe to his broken eye" - that is, he did not answer and generally pretended that he had not received any telegram.
                  1. 2news
                    2news 22 January 2016 13: 53
                    -1
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    "Sleepy goddesses" were built according to TK for a steel, high-speed, armored ocean cruiser - a trade fighter.

                    They could even be built like melee airships. It does not matter. What matters is that ACTUALLY Was built. And there were built three cruisers-inpatients.
                    In Russia, it was in the order of things. It is rare that what was built was consistent with the original plan. Of the total built up to 1MB (larger) on this topic, you can remember except that Rurik, Victory and Poltava.
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    Think about it: the government, instead of relying on the army, police and special services subordinate to it, is arming the militants of its main rival.

                    So what? Well, Kerensky did not have the strength to crush the military coup. I had to turn to the Bolsheviks. True, in return, Russia received the Bolshevik putsch. It did not work out.
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    From this they became power. Which is able to ensure compliance with its instructions.

                    Is it like the Germans in Kiev in 1941? The legitimate authority?
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    all who answered his telegrams unanimously sent the emperor to abdicate.

                    I can’t understand what makes you so indignant? The time of feudalism, as it seemed then, was gone in Russia. It is time to rise to a new qualitative stage of development, move to capitalism. No, I am aware that Russia, as a result of the efforts of the Bolsheviks, at first failed in the slave system (Bolshevism and Stalinist socialism), and later returned to feudalism (it was called developed socialism). But who then could know in advance how and what will happen?
              2. The comment was deleted.
            3. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 22 January 2016 11: 10
              0
              Quote: 2news
              Nothing. The Bolsheviks found strength. And they executed on a large scale. From this they are no longer coup, but a legitimate authority?

              The legitimacy of power is determined by the consent of the people to accept it over themselves. So the Bolsheviks became legitimate already during the Civil. smile
              Quote: 2news
              But he could not afford to promise the lumpen factory, newspaper, ship, land and landowner daughters.

              Hehe hehe ... this principalI could not afford to promise? Yes, he competed with the level of eloquence with Lev Davydovich. smile
              Kerensky himself, with his own hands, deprived himself of support. He tried, like Tagged, to sit on two chairs - in July he flirted with the right, in August - with the Soviets, in September - again with the right. As a result of his wagging, both sides considered him a dummy that did not have its strength. And why do they need such an ally in post-revolutionary Russia?
              1. 2news
                2news 22 January 2016 11: 49
                0
                Quote: Alexey RA
                The legitimacy of power is determined by the consent of the people to accept it over themselves.

                Did you come up with this yourself?
                Quote: Alexey RA
                so that the Bolsheviks became legitimate during the Civil.

                And what, the people at the same time someone asked?
                Quote: Alexey RA
                couldn’t he afford to promise? Yes, in terms of eloquence, he competed with Lev Davydovich

                Can you give examples?
                Quote: Alexey RA
                July flirted with the right, in August - with the Soviets, in September - again with the right

                I did it right. Because in Russia then there were 2 counter-revolutionary forces. These are the military (Kornilov rebellion) and leftist bandits (Bolsheviks). But with the healthy forces of society in Russia then there was a problem. If we knew in advance how things would turn out, Russia certainly had to turn in to Kornilov (the best of two bad options). But how to know something in advance?
  7. parusnik
    parusnik 21 January 2016 07: 59
    +3
    Dear author, no offense ... an article from the cycle: "So Julius Caesar was killed, but his friends remained .." without evaluation ...
  8. nivander
    nivander 21 January 2016 08: 18
    +3
    well done - get honestly earned like
  9. soldner
    soldner 21 January 2016 08: 40
    +5
    For reference to those interested.
    Central Powers and their allies: German Empire - Ukraine, Baltic States -
    Austro-Hungarian Empire - Ukraine; Ottoman Empire - Transcaucasia; Finland - territory of Russian Karelia. Bulgaria Bulgaria - Sevastopol.
    Entente Powers and their allies participating in the intervention
    Great Britain - SPSR (Northern Russia Support Force) of up to 28 thousand people (June-October 1919 evacuated), military mission, South Russian Tank Detachment and 47th Squadron under the Armed Forces of the South of Russia, also - intervention in Transcaucasia (Georgia) .Vladivostok -
    British colonies and dominions: Australia Australia - from October 1918 Arkhangelsk, Murmansk (withdrawn June 11, 1919) 4000 soldiers Canada Canada - from October 1918 Arkhangelsk, Murmansk 500 gunners (withdrawn June 11, 1919), Siberia 3500-4000 soldiers (withdrawn April 1919 )
    British India India - battalions of the Mesopotamian expeditionary forces, Transcaucasia 1919-1920.
    USA - from August 1918 participation in the SPSR, Arkhangelsk, Murmansk, the Trans-Siberian Railway. The total number of American troops in the North of Russia is up to 6000 people, in Siberia up to 9000 people. France - the north of Russia, landing in Arkhangelsk, participation in the SPSR
    South of Russia (Odessa, Kherson, Sevastopol) November 1918 - April 1919.
    Siberia - Siberian Colonial Infantry Battalion and Siberian Colonial Artillery Battery. Colonial French troops (Odessa, November 1918 - April 1919) - 4th African Horse-Jaeger Regiment, 21st Regiment of Native Riflemen, 10th Regiment of Algerian Riflemen, 9- 8st battalion of the 1th regiment of Algerian riflemen, 129st marching Indochinese battalion; Sevastopol is the XNUMXth battalion of Senegalese shooters.
    Italy - Participation in the SPSR (Murmansk), September 1919 - August 1919 soldiers
    Siberia and the Far East - November 1918 - August 1919 (Irkutsk, Krasnoyarsk)
    Greece - from the beginning of 1919 to April 1919 (Odessa). About 2000 people
    Black Sea November 1918 - March 1920 2 battleships, 1 battleship, 8 destroyers, 1 hospital ship and 1 transport
    Romania Romania - occupation of Bessarabia in early 1918
    Poland Soviet-Polish War 1919-20 (Polish Army, underground "Polish Military Organization")
    Japan - Vladivostok, the Trans-Siberian section from Verkhneudinsk to Khabarovsk and Iman, Sakhalin since April 1918. Withdrew in 1921. Two divisions of approximately 28 bayonets. In addition to the units of the regular army, after the start of the intervention, armed units were formed from “residents” - ethnic Japanese living in Siberia (in particular, in Blagoveshchensk-on-Amur, a detachment of more than 000 people was created, which was under the command of Japanese officers).
    China - the Far East did not take an active part in the intervention - armored cruiser II rank “Haijun” (海 容) under the command of Commodore Lin Jiangzhang (林 建 章), part of the 33rd infantry regiment of the 9th infantry division under the command of Song Huanzhang (宋焕章) guard units and detachments of border guards
    Transbaikalia - "Khan's brigade" (subordinate to the Japanese).
    Arkhangelsk and Murmansk 1918-1919 - Chinese battalion
    Also in the SPSR were: Serbia, the Serbian battalion, the Finnish Karelian legion (Karelian regiment) and the Finnish Murmansk legion (corresponding to the brigade), the Danish volunteer battalion (800 bayonets).
    1. Give the light
      Give the light 21 January 2016 14: 05
      +1
      ... and do not forget to remind people how these troops helped the Reds .... also interesting ...
  10. Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 21 January 2016 09: 02
    +2
    Quote: Glot
    Yes, everything is much, much more complicated. And not six, and not seven or ten sides conflicted.
    There, only the "white" could not agree among themselves what exactly they want and which way to go. Actually, this is one of the reasons, and serious reasons for their defeat - total disunity.
    And as for Makhno, you can't fit in two lines there either. And the slogan was rather "For Soviets without Bolsheviks." It was he already at the end, when he realized that there were some enemies around him, he began to beat everyone to the right and to the left, sliding down to a banal bandit, and before that everything was different.
    In general, a very superficial look in the article. But, the history of the Civil and a thousand articles does not fit. So that ...

    I agree. In my opinion, the author simply expressed his opinion.
  11. mishastich
    mishastich 21 January 2016 09: 23
    +3
    At VO there are authors writing about the WWI - Alexander Samsonov, Oleg Ayrapetov and others.
    I recommend comrade Laniste should be guided by them if he decided to write a series of articles about the Civil War.
  12. 2news
    2news 21 January 2016 10: 19
    -5
    Reds. For the working people!

    Did the author decide to make fun? The Reds meant that working people. Yeah.
    and legitimacy (and, as a consequence, the possibility of holding mass appeals) ultimately brought them victory.

    The author is a serious comedian. For some reason, he "forgot" to indicate that it was the red coup of January 1918. served as the reason for the collapse of Russia into a number of states and the beginning of the Civil War. Those. the red ones were completely illegitimate.
    And the victory for the Reds was ensured by repression of the "enemies" (yes, Dzhugashvili was not the first to invent "enemies") and promises. As it turned out later, completely empty. Those. banal lies. On the other hand, many of the Buratins still believe in the allegedly existing "public property". Let them believe. Because others believe in reptilians. And the third in the predictions of Nostradamus. These are all "faiths" of the same order. I will not name which one.
    It is believed that in the case of the (unlikely) military victory of the whites in the form in which they wanted it (i.e., the overthrow of the Lenin government)

    Of course, these "opinions" in the propaganda campaign of the Central Committee of the CPSU were then invented by the sea. Anything can be justified. Truth in another, the only legitimate body at that time was the Constituent Assembly. And it was dispersed by the Bolsheviks. The reason is very simple, they lost the elections there. But this is not a reason to give up power, is it?
    Yes, here's another, for those who are not in the know. The elections to the Constituent Assembly were won by the Social Revolutionaries. Led by Kerensky. And it was he who was to become the legitimate head of Russia. What did you hear about Kerensky? Through the efforts of agitprop, he is represented by some kind of miserable clown. Even the story of his escape and dressing was invented from beginning to end, as is now known. Do you believe that Russia voted for the clown? Do you believe that the normal political forces of Russia of that period recognized the victory of the clown? Me not. But the Bolshevik putschists forced descendants memorize that it was just that.
    And B. Savenkov became the temporary head of Russia until Kerensky returned from emigration. What do you know about him through the efforts of the Bolsheviks? That this is an international terrorist (terrorized the unfortunate Bolshevik sheep after their putsch). This is how the Bolsheviks wrote "the history of the USSR". By the way, the Bolsheviks executed Savenkov. Those. everything is simple, the elected and legitimate head of Russia was executed by them. And the former head of Russia was executed by them. "Great people", what to say.
    The fate of all these citizens is the same - the Red Army came and reconciled everyone. With fate.

    Not at all. The Bolsheviks voluntarily renounced significant territories of Russia. First, in the Brest Treaty. And then, after the unsuccessful "Polish campaign", which, if successful, was planned directly to the Atlantic Ocean, until the end of the 30s they settled down behind the "Curzon line".
    Do not forget that the Civil War was essentially part of the First World War

    Bosh what.
    Naturally, the rest of the Entente raises a number of logical questions, the first of which is “Why not bite?” And they decided to bite.

    But this is not nonsense, but nonsense.
    1. MrK
      MrK 21 January 2016 11: 37
      +1
      Quote: 2news
      Bosh what.


      Indeed, what you wrote is nonsense.
      1. 2news
        2news 21 January 2016 11: 43
        -2
        Quote: mrark
        Indeed, what you wrote is nonsense.

        Learn the story you need.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. V.ic
      V.ic 21 January 2016 13: 59
      -1
      Quote: 2news
      By the way, the Bolsheviks executed Savenkova.

      Savenkova may have been executed, but there is no verdict or trial about Savinkov Boris Viktorovich. You should speak at rallies in support of Baruch Elson, there would be no price!
      1. 2news
        2news 21 January 2016 14: 12
        +1
        Quote: V.ic
        but there is no verdict or trial about Savinkov Boris Viktorovich.

        The military collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR on August 29, 1924 sentenced him to capital punishment - execution. The Supreme Court petitioned the Presidium of the CEC of the USSR to commute the sentence. The petition was granted, the execution was replaced by imprisonment for 10 years.
        According to the official version, on May 7, 1925, in the Cheka on the Lubyanka, Savinkov committed suicide by taking advantage of the lack of a window grill in the room where he was on his return from a walk and jumped out of the fifth floor window into the courtyard.
        However, there is a version according to which Savinkov was killed by officers of the Cheka, since V.I.Speransky allegedly at that time heard a shot in the courtyard of the Cheka building. At the same time Savenkov "returned from a walk" for some reason at 23:20.
        What actually happened there is not exactly known. But as a public figure and politician, Savenkov was definitely executed even with a 10-year sentence.
    3. Chtononibrator
      Chtononibrator 21 January 2016 14: 50
      +3
      And in what elections did the interim government win to be considered legitimate? Another crunch of franzbulka ...
      1. 2news
        2news 21 January 2016 15: 34
        +2
        Quote: Chtononibrator
        Another crunch of franzbulka ...

        I don’t know, maybe your rolls and crunch in French. You know better. This is not for historians, this is for doctors.
        But the Provisional Government was legitimate and consensus. It was coalitional and represented by all the main political forces of Russia. Bolsheviks and other gorlopans with small-criminal inclinations were not invited there because of their lack of support in society. This is clearly seen from the vote in the Constituent Assembly, which was held under the control of the Bolsheviks. Actually, for this, the October coup was made (later it was called BOSR by the Bolsheviks). Even in these conditions, they received only 24,5% of the vote, and their accomplices left Socialist-Revolutionaries another 5,5%. And the elections won the expected Social Revolutionary Kerensky (51,7%).
        So, the Provisional Government consisted of those people for whom Russia subsequently voted.
        But later, as a result of the Bolshevik coup in January 1918, the legitimate war in Russia was overthrown and a well-armed organized crime group came to power (they called themselves Bolsheviks). Then you know.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 21 January 2016 16: 41
          0
          Quote: 2news
          But the Provisional Government was legitimate and consensus. It was coalitional and represented by all the main political forces of Russia.

          Which of the interim governments? And then its composition changed every couple of months.
          1. 2news
            2news 21 January 2016 16: 47
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And then its composition changed every couple of months.

            Correctly. So it should have been in those conditions of instability. Before the advent of the dictatorship of the Bonapartist type. Unfortunately, this did not happen.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 21 January 2016 19: 23
              0
              Quote: 2news
              Correctly. So it should have been in those conditions of instability. Before the advent of the dictatorship of the Bonapartist type. Unfortunately, this did not happen.

              Did the patient sweat before death? It's good...

              The country is fighting in the World War. Transport and industry since the end of 1916 - on the verge of collapse. Even what the Allies supply, settles in port warehouses and does not reach the front. Dual power in the country. Army or rally. or stupidly going home. But we will be three times change curtains in a brothel.

              The Bonapartist type dictatorship just appeared. Bonaparte just came on the left. smile
              1. 2news
                2news 21 January 2016 20: 00
                -3
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Dual power in the country.

                There was no diarchy. In the capital was knocked together (Trotsky, by the way), a strong armed criminal group. And she terrorized the population of the capital.
                Even after the capture of Zimny, the Bolsheviks assured everyone that they were temporarily, only until the election to the Constituent Assembly. Then they deceived, of course. Who would doubt that.
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Army or rally. or stupidly going home.

                He does it right.
                Quote: Alexey RA
                But we will change the curtains in the brothel three times

                333 times. If only the last one was correct. And not the one that happened.
                Quote: Alexey RA
                The Bonapartist type dictatorship just appeared. Bonaparte just came on the left.

                Bonaparte never comes from the left. Therefore, such a dictatorship is called the "Bonapartist type".
                1. Mr. Pip
                  Mr. Pip 21 January 2016 21: 03
                  0
                  Quote: 2news
                  Then they deceived, of course.

                  Well, it means that the authorities had the same mugs, which it was not a sin to deceive - but why do we need mugs in power? fellow
                  1. 2news
                    2news 21 January 2016 21: 21
                    -2
                    Quote: Mr. PIP
                    whom to deceive is not a sin

                    Each has its own level of morality. You, apparently, are just Bolshevik.
                    Quote: Mr PIP
                    why do we need mugs in power

                    Decent people can be mugs. This is not a sin. But pathological sadists and villains, such as the Bolsheviks, are really bad. Take an interest in the losses of Russia in the population over the years of their power. Get stunned.
                    1. Mr. Pip
                      Mr. Pip 21 January 2016 21: 44
                      0
                      Quote: 2news
                      Decent people can be mugs.

                      They cannot be burdocks officials
                      Quote: 2news
                      But pathological sadists and villains, such as the Bolsheviks, are really bad.

                      And among the "white" sadists that, at all, were not? laughing
                      1. 2news
                        2news 21 January 2016 22: 09
                        -1
                        Quote: Mr. PIP
                        Officials cannot be burdocks

                        Where will you be from? Why do you have everything involves fraud and deception? From the USA (judging by the flag)? I have not heard that everything was so criminal in the USA. You are probably somehow out of luck there. Or is the US unlucky with you?
                        Quote: Mr. PIP
                        And among the "white" sadists that, at all, were not?

                        Perhaps they were. How without it? But the scale is different.
                2. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 22 January 2016 12: 20
                  0
                  Quote: 2news
                  There was no diarchy. In the capital was knocked together (Trotsky, by the way), a strong armed criminal group.

                  With whom the government worked closely. Or did you forget who you had to turn to suppress the Kornilov rebellion?
                  If the power for six months can not restore order in their own capital - what kind of power? But there are even more egregious examples: for example, the fleet, which first turned out to comply with orders without approval by the Fleet Council, and then generally refused to the Temporary workers in recognition of their authority. Or Ukraine, which ignored the representatives of the center and controlled by the decisions of the local Council.
                  Power is called power because it rules the country. And during the Temporary Workers, the fleets were controlled by the Fleet Councils, and the army by the soldiers' councils. by rail - Wikzhel.
                  1. 2news
                    2news 22 January 2016 12: 47
                    0
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    With whom the government worked closely. Or did you forget who you had to turn to suppress the Kornilov rebellion?

                    Of course, Kerensky was spinning as he could. Between the devil and the deep sea.
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    If the power for six months can not restore order in their own capital - what kind of power?

                    So they interfered with her. The Bolshevik organized crime group located in Petrograd interfered.
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    e.g. fleet

                    There was no fleet in Russia, do not fanatize. The entire fleet disappeared into the REV. What remained was not drawn to the squadron.
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    Or Ukraine, which ignored the representatives of the center and controlled by the decisions of the local Council.

                    Don't la-la. Ukraine even participated in the elections to the Constituent Assembly. It "fell off" on January 22, 1918, 3 days after the Bolsheviks dispersed the Constituent Assembly.
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    Power is called power because it rules the country.

                    The degree of strength of the central government at different times and in different places is different. This happens especially often during wars. Especially in the temporarily occupied territories. This does not mean that some kind of strong organized crime group at some point in the city of Durakov is the legitimate authority.
    4. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 21 January 2016 16: 37
      0
      Quote: 2news
      And then, after the unsuccessful "Polish campaign", which, if successful, was planned directly to the Atlantic Ocean, until the end of the 30s they settled down behind the "Curzon line".

      Do not remind me - why would the Bolsheviks begin the Polish campaign? And most importantly - with what boundaries did it start?
      Quote: 2news
      Do you believe that Russia voted for the clown? Do you believe that the normal political forces of Russia of that period recognized the victory of the clown?

      What is the vote of Russia, what are you talking about?
      Kerensky was the prime minister of the Temporary workers. This was a compromise figure put forward after another showdown in the Provisional Government in order to calm the Soviets.

      As for his leadership qualities - they can be judged by the results of his reign. By September 1917, Kerensky did not even have faithful army units. to stop one Kornilov’s division. By October 1917, the Temporary Workers controlled only the Winter Palace.

      By the way, can you remind me - who actively promoted the notorious Order No. 1, which consolidated the abolition of subordination and the breakdown of discipline in the army? wink
      1. 2news
        2news 21 January 2016 16: 54
        -3
        Quote: Alexey RA
        And most importantly - with what boundaries did it start?

        What for? It is best to recall who organized and created these initial frontiers.
        Quote: Alexey RA
        What is the vote of Russia, what are you talking about?

        Clear. About the elections to the Constituent Assembly in November-December 1917. you do not know.
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Kerensky was the prime minister of the Temporary workers.

        And Lenin was also considered the head of the temporary workers. After all, why was there no resistance to the November Bolshevik putsch? Because the Bolsheviks declared their temporal status until January 1918. Before the election of the authorities elected in 1917. Constituent Assembly. But then they lost the election there and dispersed the Constituent Assembly.
        Quote: Alexey RA
        This was a compromise figure put forward after another showdown in the Provisional Government in order to calm the Soviets.

        Funny.
        Quote: Alexey RA
        By September 1917, Kerensky did not even have faithful army units. to stop one Kornilov’s division. By October 1917, the Temporary Workers controlled only the Winter Palace.

        Oh, this Kerensky. And why is it in November 1917? more than half of Russia's voters voted for him? Are they foolish? I think no.
        Quote: Alexey RA
        By the way, can you remind me - who actively promoted the notorious Order No. 1, which consolidated the abolition of subordination and the breakdown of discipline in the army?

        Why is it sad? The order was correct. You cannot ruin what is not. Only vain sacrifices. Love when Russian blood flows like a river? And wider?
        And then blaming everything on Kerensky, of course, was convenient. And above all to the stupid and mediocre generals. Then even the sergeants chased them across the steppes like dogs. They were not even accepted into military service in Yugoslavia. We understood the level of their "professionalism". Pimps and taxi drivers. This was their real maximum.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 21 January 2016 19: 28
          0
          Quote: 2news
          What for? It is best to recall who organized and created these initial frontiers.

          The non-commissioned officer widow carved herself.
          Infernal Bolsheviks are undoubtedly to blame for the Polish attack. They are generally to blame for everything by default. Even in the fact that the party, which at the beginning of 1917 had about 20 members, managed to win the Civil as a result. smile

          And do not talk about the independence of Poland - wide national-cultural autonomy (like Chechnya 1997 smile ) for Poland was promised even by Nicholas.
          1. 2news
            2news 21 January 2016 20: 03
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            In the attack of Poland

            How! Some new "historical revelations".
            Quote: Alexey RA
            with about 1917 members at the beginning of 20

            Quantity and quality are two different things.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And do not about the independence of Poland

            What are you talking about? Did I mention Poland before?
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 22 January 2016 13: 15
              0
              Quote: 2news
              How! Some new "historical revelations".

              That is, the fact that the "Polish campaign" began from the Polotsk-Gomel-Uman line does not surprise you?
              Well, yes, Kiev is a primordially Polish city. And Minsk too. And Vilno. smile
              1. 2news
                2news 22 January 2016 13: 21
                -1
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Well, yes, Kiev is a primordially Polish city. And Minsk too. And Vilno

                What did you mean? That the Bolsheviks refused so many lands at the conclusion of the Brest Peace?
              2. The comment was deleted.
    5. Parsec
      Parsec 22 January 2016 00: 27
      +5
      You are extremely harsh in judgments, unceremonious in expressions, pretend to some knowledge, inaccessible to others, and take the liberty of making diagnoses (rude, in a simple way).

      Where did your political predilections and anti-Bolshevism come from? - Your own business, but speaking knowledgeable, at the same time, you demonstrate the utmost dullness and your knowledge at the level of "heard something":
      - You name B. Savinkov Savenkov - where then. Texts not seen, all the oral tradition?
      - "And B. Savenkov became the temporary head of Russia until Kerensky returned from emigration" - where does this come from? The highest post, to which Savinkov rose - the head of the Ministry of War and the Deputy Minister of War under the Minister of War Kerensky A.F. What is the temporary head of Russia, what is it about?

      Quote: 2news
      By the way, the Bolsheviks executed Savenkova. Those. everything is simple, the elected and legitimate head of Russia was executed by them. And the former head of Russia was executed by them.


      Who, when, and on the basis of what law chose Savinkov as the head of which Russia?

      Who executed Savinkov, on what charge and whose sentence? Murder? Did you learn this from Solzhenitsyn, from the greatest liar of Russian, um, literature?

      The former head of Russia, Kerensky, successfully lived to nearly a hundred years in the United States. Even earlier - Nicholas II - at the time of the execution was not the head of Russia, because he abdicated.

      It’s not funny when adults (?) People play monarchists or White Guards without having the slightest relation to these groups, and, even worse, without imagining either the history of the period or the people in this period. Yes, it would be nothing, you never know who plays what; but to preach at the same time in the style of "You didn't know" is nowhere.

      The most correct for you will be to leave the resource from shame, if any.
      1. PHANTOM-AS
        PHANTOM-AS 22 January 2016 00: 32
        0
        Quote: Parsec
        Parsec

        You are well done! Shake your hand! hi drinks
        1. V.ic
          V.ic 22 January 2016 06: 28
          0
          Quote: PHANTOM-AS
          You are well done! Shake your hand!

          Join us! good
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
        1. Aleksander
          Aleksander 22 January 2016 07: 46
          +1
          Quote: 2news
          . B. Savinkov was the leader of the victorious parliamentary faction in the Constituent Assembly. Those. in fact, he was the legitimate head of state at that time. But not the bloodthirsty burry Ulyanov. The fact that the Bolsheviks did not allow him to take office was not his fault.


          The only clarification-the Chairman of the Constituent Assembly was elected Chernov and it was he who was the LEGAL leader of Russia, and not Ulyanov.
          1. 2news
            2news 22 January 2016 10: 03
            +1
            Quote: Aleksander
            The only clarification-Chernov was elected Chairman of the Constituent Assembly, and it was he who was the LEGAL leader of Russia, and not Ulyanov.

            Formally, yes, you are right. But the majority in the Constituent Assembly controlled the Social Revolutionaries. And then their leader was Savinkov (Kerensky was in exile, he was persecuted by the Bolsheviks). Those. in any country in the world, Savinkov would be the actual (but not formal) leader of the state.
            But the Bolshevik putschists did not sleep. They lost the elections, so they went through an open seizure of power. Of course, the national borderlands did not recognize such "power"; they simply "fell away" from Russia. And the healthy forces of society tried to organize resistance against the Bolshevik putschists. But they couldn't. Just healthy forces in society were not enough.
            And who absolutely certainly had no legitimate rights to power in Russia was Ulyanov with his gang.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Aleksander
              Aleksander 22 January 2016 12: 18
              0
              Quote: 2news
              But the majority in the Constituent Assembly controlled Social Revolutionaries. And then their leader was Savinkov (Kerensky was in exile, he was persecuted by the Bolsheviks). Those. in any country in the world, Savinkov would be the actual (but not formal) leader of the state.


              The fact is that Viktor Mikhailovich Chernov is one of founders of the Socialist Revolutionary Party and its main theorist. And he was the legal leader of Russia.
  13. Kuzyakin15
    Kuzyakin15 21 January 2016 10: 40
    +3
    2news:
    Dear, you also posted no less nonsense in komente and, in principle, only slogans.
    1. 2news
      2news 21 January 2016 11: 46
      -1
      Quote: Kuzyakin15
      and, in principle, only slogans.

      Learn history. It is now available. And the "slogans" will become facts.
  14. qwert
    qwert 21 January 2016 11: 18
    +3
    Quote: Kuzyakin15
    Dear, you also posted no less nonsense in komente and, in principle, only slogans.

    I agree, and those are still slogans from which he draws the putrid spirit of Solzhenitsin, Svanidze and other stuff ...
    1. 2news
      2news 21 January 2016 11: 45
      -1
      Quote: qwert
      I agree, and those are still slogans from which he draws the putrid spirit of Solzhenitsin, Svanidze and other stuff ...

      And where do you come from, such politicized ignoramus throats? Learn the story you need.
      1. Grey47
        Grey47 21 January 2016 20: 25
        0
        I read your comments, I'm sorry but you are a rare stump, continuous slogans of controversial conclusions and attacks on opponents. Analyze what you read or you will remain a rude fool.
        1. 2news
          2news 21 January 2016 20: 54
          -2
          Quote: Grey47
          Read your comments

          Do not exaggerate. To "read" means not only to put letters into words, but to understand what you read. And this is not your way, as I understand it.
          Quote: Grey47
          but you are a rare stump

          Same end and same place.
          Quote: Grey47
          solid slogans controversial findings and attacks on opponents

          In fact, everything is reasoned and historically true. The fact that it disagrees with the Bolshevik version is that I’m just not used to lying. How are they.
          Quote: Grey47
          Analyze read

          What is it like? According to your technique? Print the text and then eat it? And then later in the toilet to analyze?
          Quote: Grey47
          you will remain a boorish fool

          About the end in the same place I wrote to you? I wrote. I confirm.
      2. Grey47
        Grey47 21 January 2016 20: 25
        -1
        I read your comments, I'm sorry but you are a rare stump, continuous slogans of controversial conclusions and attacks on opponents. Analyze what you read or you will remain a rude fool.
  15. Fat
    Fat 21 January 2016 11: 27
    0
    http://www.geraldika.org/04_2006_06.htm
    On March 27, 1919, Father Makhno's troops liberated the city from Denikin’s battles
    Mariupol. The capture of the city is an unusual event for 1919, since
    with the blows of the red brigade commander, the entire flank of the Denikin volunteers collapsed, and
    the situation at the front resolutely turned in favor of the Red Army. Behind
    this operation brigade commander Makhno was awarded the Order of the Red Banner. All
    researchers of life Makhno agree that he received the order number
    four. Despite the fact that the data of the Soviet archives are partially seized,
    partially destroyed, historians still managed to find evidence of
    receiving his order for the operation on March 27, 1919. As noted in the victory
    P. Dybenko’s report: “The Zadniprovsk brigade took the port city of Mariupol,
    breaking the resistance of the White Guards and the French squadron, while
    the fortitude and courage of the regiments was unspeakable. More than 4 million pounds captured
    coal and a lot of military equipment. Brigade Commander N. Makhno and Regiment V. Kurylenko
    one of the first in the RSFSR awarded the Order of the Red Banner. " Are available
    also evidence that, receiving the award, Nestor Ivanovich said
    the following phrase: “I’m fighting not for the order, but for the victory of the revolution, since I
    peasant. And now our goal is to defend and protect the victory of the revolution from
    whites. "
    So much for the "green" Old Man Makhno ... A similar situation with the ataman Grigoriev, who heroically took Odessa ...
  16. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 21 January 2016 11: 30
    -1
    "The real help of the Entente to the whites consisted only in the supply of military material values,
    primarily uniforms and food (not even weapons and ammunition) "////

    Delivered tanks, aircraft, armored vehicles. Often with pilots,
    volunteer tankers from England, America.
    Another thing is that their tactical interaction with volunteer infantry and cavalry
    was weak. Logistics and supply of the Good Army was lower than the plinth.
    Gasoline, kerosene, shells were not delivered on time. Those. there was no service.
    The tanks themselves were hopelessly stuck on the railway. stations ...
    1. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan 21 January 2016 20: 43
      +1
      Only in Poland were American pilots.

      If the Entente showed such a desire, Soviet power would collapse instantly.
      However, the Whites were "For One and Indivisible", while the Soviets made significant territorial concessions. Why should they blame Soviet Russia in favor of the United Empire? So they supplied a little, so that the conflict would last as long as possible.
  17. andrew42
    andrew42 21 January 2016 11: 41
    +1
    About the participation of the Entente and other interventionists. Pikul has an excellent novel "Out of the Dead End" on this topic. Almost a chronology about the most strategically dangerous direction of the intervention - the occupation of the Russian North. The novel clearly describes that there was no intelligible "white" movement in the north: the interventionists set up a circus with a few compromisers from former monarchists and supporters of the Constituent Assembly, and all really monarchist and patriotic cadres (talking about anti-Bolshevik elements) were mercilessly destroyed. That there is only the disarmed battleship "Chesma", which the British and Americans drowned along with half of the crew. And in concentration camps there both "whites" and "reds" found the same end, only "pod-pin-dos-niki" (in modern language) survived, and from both sides they ran to the invaders, there were such cadres. As a result, it was the Reds who had to fight off the Russian North, and practically the entire population was consolidated under the red flag. But the Americans were already in Kotlas! This is almost Vyatka, and there it is a stone's throw to the Kama region. Thus, the alignment was completely different in different regions of the former empire. If in Siberia, in the south of Russia, in the Don, and in the Urals the Whites had many supporters, then in the North, apart from the Reds, there was no consolidating force. Each region had its "own" civil war.
    1. Give the light
      Give the light 21 January 2016 14: 16
      +2
      but as a writer Kuprin writes about the good army of white ... the entire population of the cities was greeted as liberators ... and only the Jews met the Reds .... why would it ... and how Tula fought with the red infection ... it seems to be workers But no, for the whites the Motherland was protected from the Red Jews ...
      1. semirek
        semirek 21 January 2016 20: 42
        +1
        Quote: Give the light
        but as a writer Kuprin writes about the good army of white ... the entire population of the cities was greeted as liberators ... and only the Jews met the Reds .... why would it ... and how Tula fought with the red infection ... it seems to be workers But no, for the whites the Motherland was protected from the Red Jews ...

        And remember the Izhevsk division - workers
        Izhevsk and
        Votkinsk factories fought under the red banner of Kolchak, not everything was so simple and unambiguous with the Bolsheviks, they were not so "fluffy".
  18. tacet
    tacet 21 January 2016 13: 54
    +1
    This is not a complete list of the parties involved. I will not talk about the former inhabitants of the Russian Empire (there will be sides to the book with a volume of "War and Peace"), but, mentioning the intervention, the author names only the Entente and Germany (these are only 3 states). He is silent about Japan, the USA (to the Entente NEVER INCLUDED), Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, Italy, Greece, Romania, China, Bulgaria. (Maybe I forgot someone, Poland and Finland don't count - they were part of the Russian Empire). About activities (during the intervention) each of them can write at least a page (very concise).
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 21 January 2016 14: 54
      0
      Quote: tacet
      .About the activity (during the intervention) each of them can write a minimum page (very concise).

      If my memory serves me right, then TWENTY TWO countries took part in the intervention in the RSFSR, but in our school the historian included all countries, even those that were formerly part of the Russian Empire, since these countries had already gained independence and were not part of the RSFSR. I join those who believe that the article is at the abstract level.
      1. bober1982
        bober1982 21 January 2016 15: 00
        +2
        there are a lot of countries participating in the intervention, and the RSFSR did not exist then. There are no words at the level of the current school historians.
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 21 January 2016 23: 29
          -1
          I named the number of countries as a keepsake, later I http://topwar.ru/user/soldner/I entered a list of countries participating in the intervention in Russia. The date of the creation of the RSFSR July 19, 1918. Here is the link. Http: //historynotes.ru/ rossiyskaya-sovetskaya-federativnaya-socialistiche
          skaya-respublika /
          1. bober1982
            bober1982 21 January 2016 23: 44
            0
            we will assume that I was mistaken (with the RSFSR), although it is probably right to call Soviet Russia, but this is my opinion.
  19. Kerzhak
    Kerzhak 21 January 2016 15: 12
    -1
    The civil war in Russia ended in 1920, and in the east of the country in 1922. Well, not in 1923.
    1. semirek
      semirek 21 January 2016 20: 39
      0
      Quote: Kerzhak
      The civil war in Russia ended in 1920, and in the east of the country in 1922. Well, not in 1923.


      I think the civil war lasted until the 50s.
      1. 2news
        2news 21 January 2016 22: 36
        -1
        Quote: semirek
        I think the civil war lasted until the 50s.

        Until the end of 1991 Only in hidden form. At the end of 1991 she went into open form.
  20. Egor123
    Egor123 21 January 2016 17: 43
    0
    The civil war would go on for more than a dozen years, for lovers and connoisseurs of "Schubert waltzes and crunchy French rolls"


    And where did you find among whites a lover of "French rolls" and "Schubert's waltzes"?
    The white movement mainly consisted of military officers who fought in the First World War and the Russo-Japanese Wars, who, although they held different views, still did not like these "French rolls and" Schubert's waltzes "
    1. Chtononibrator
      Chtononibrator 21 January 2016 18: 33
      -2
      Well yes, they loved losing in wars.
  21. semirek
    semirek 21 January 2016 20: 32
    +1
    And in the end: hiding behind demagogic-populist speeches about the so-called state of workers and peasants, and the general world revolution, Lenin with Trotsky and a number of Jewish comrades, stripped Mother Russia to the skin --- destroying any competitors for power, eliminating, or forcing to emigrate the owners Having safely seized this property, all that remained was to legalize it. Legalization, oddly enough, began immediately after the civil war, in the year 21, and slogans like Down with the bourgeoisie (old) disappeared at once. At one point, the former Red brigades, division commanders, and even just cunning red commissars suddenly became the owners of "candle" factories, not to mention the top party elite, proteges of Western capital, which thanks to her began to pump national wealth from the destroyed country. After a long struggle in the Politburo, Stalin managed to defeat this clan led by Trotsky in 27 year, as a result of the newly made bourgeoisie, everything had to be given to the state, well, in the future, and P.
  22. Cap.Morgan
    Cap.Morgan 21 January 2016 20: 37
    +2
    Michael Weller wrote a good book on this subject.
    Well, Putin's opinion - "Lenin planted an atomic bomb under Russia"
  23. semirek
    semirek 21 January 2016 22: 32
    +1
    Yes, the white movement could not defeat Bolshevism, it can be considered to be leaders, officers and soldiers of the white cause in every way, but these people at least had their own principles, fought for their Russia. We, however, indifferently contemplated the collapse of a no less great country --but they didn’t hit finger on finger in the name of saving her, and so he asks if we have the right to condemn these people?
    1. Chtononibrator
      Chtononibrator 22 January 2016 00: 09
      -3
      Yeah, they fought for their Russia, killing its other citizens, the principles are right.
  24. misterwulf
    misterwulf 22 January 2016 02: 50
    +2
    And where can be attributed the so-called Belo-Chekhov? It seems to be the Whites, but in fact, by themselves. Also Kolchak’s Stirmley Gold laughing
    In fact, this is not the Whites and not only the Czechs, but a diverse rabble of Austro-Hungarian prisoners of war, where the majority were Czechs, because Czechs most of all voluntarily surrendered to the Russian army, while the majority completely switched to the side of the Republic of Ingushetia and continued the war on the side of Russia.
    For those, the ideology was of Panslavism until ... the exit of Russia from 1MV.e Then no. Many Czechs, as the famous writer Yaroslav Hasek (Schweik) fought on the side of the Reds. Who are they? Red-Czechs?
  25. HeraGerov
    HeraGerov 22 January 2016 09: 28
    -1
    A disgusting article in its amateurism and tongue-tied language! Pulling out and distorting the facts by a person who has no idea what he is writing about. For example, the emir of Bukhara at that time was Sayyid Alim Khan, and not some Akbar.
  26. Starshina wmf
    Starshina wmf 22 January 2016 13: 28
    0
    The British, Americans, French, Jews, Ukrainians and even Canadians here discuss the civil war in Russia. What to discuss, who the people went for, whose discipline and support he defeated. Do not forget that after the revolution Russia took leaps and bounds. Yes, with victims, but it happens. The educational level is worth it. The tsar's peasants were 90% illiterate. Of course, the Bolsheviks didn’t have all the good, but their goals were better than those of the same monarchists.