Military Review

Catastrophic mistakes of the USSR government in foreign policy

98
In economic construction, Leonid Brezhnev did not make serious mistakes, but at the same time in foreign policy, he repeated the same mistakes that all leaders of the Soviet state, who came to power after the death of Joseph Stalin, made it to him.


Catastrophic mistakes of the USSR government in foreign policy


Leonid Brezhnev believed in the possibility of friendship with the West and sought to establish good-neighborly relations with Western countries. He did not understand that Western countries, firstly, in their policies do not apply such a thing as friendship, and, secondly, that in the West Russia has never had true friends for all its existence even among the Slavic peoples. except courageous Orthodox Serbs. And it would be possible to justify Brezhnev’s foreign policy, if we were weak, but during his rule of the USSR he was as powerful as the West. In international politics, Leonid Brezhnev made serious mistakes and thereby inflicted his Brezhnev blow on the USSR.

Cooperation with the countries of Eastern Europe was developed through the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA). In 1971, the CMEA adopted a twenty-year program of cooperation and development. Trade turnover with the CMEA countries amounted to 50% of the total trade turnover of the USSR. The Druzhba oil pipeline and the Soyuz gas pipeline were built, and the Mir energy system was created. Many Soviet people wore clothes and shoes made and manufactured in the CMEA countries. Even the production of helicopters with gas turbine engines "Mi-2" was transferred to the CMEA country - Poland. Not assembly, namely the entire production. Production of the An-2 aircraft was also transferred.

The USSR placed in the CMEA countries orders for the production of civilian ships and other products of heavy industry, seeking to create and maintain a high level of industrial development in Eastern European countries. Czechoslovakia supplied a huge number of remarkable Java motorcycles to the USSR. Such actions of the Soviet Union fastened the CMEA countries together, and in the absence of Western intervention in the internal affairs of the countries of Eastern Europe, the USSR could live with them in friendship and harmony for decades.

In relations with Western countries, the USSR made completely unjustified concessions. 1 July 1968 of the USSR signed an agreement on nuclear non-proliferation weapons with England, and then with the United States and other countries. The treaty is signed by 100 countries. Some promised not to distribute weapons, others not to accept them and not to produce them. The nuclear powers - France and China, as well as countries such as Pakistan, Israel, South Africa, and India - have not signed the treaty. The USSR did not need this treaty. The treaty was needed by the United States, who feared that countries with nuclear weapons would come out of the dictates of America.

30 September 1971 was an agreement between the USSR and the USA on measures to reduce the risk of a nuclear war. It envisaged a number of measures to protect nuclear weapons, and also envisaged the improvement of the direct communication line between the leaders of the USSR and the USA.

Earlier, in March 1966, France withdrew from NATO and its President Charles de Gaulle was received in the Kremlin with Russian cordiality. A. N. Kosygin made a return visit to France. With President J.Pompidou of France replacing de Gaulle in 1971, L.I. Brezhnev signed a cooperation agreement.
In reality, the USSR’s friendship with France did not provide either political or economic benefits. But France, by demarche of withdrawal from NATO and an agreement with the USSR, strengthened its status as an independent country compared to other Western European countries, which fully complied with the will of the United States. I think that Brezhnev did not even understand with whom he was dealing.

Project de Gaulle, France was Europe from Brest to the Urals. This project will then be picked up by the traitors of the national interests of Russia Gorbachev and Shevardnadze. But if we look at the project more deeply, then it does not belong to the three named political figures.

The project “Europe from Brest to the Urals” is a project of A. Hitler and for its implementation in 1941 the USSR crossed the 5,5 million armed soldiers to the teeth of soldiers and officers of Germany, Hungary, Romania, Italy and Finland! For the sake of this project, they fought a war with our country to exterminate the peoples of the Soviet Union. Hitler spoke and wrote about this repeatedly and openly, and L. I. Brezhnev rejoiced at his diplomatic successes.

But, in my opinion, the USSR-Germany non-aggression treaty signed by 12 on August 1970 in Moscow caused the greatest damage to the USSR. This treaty was only the beginning of the signing of documents officially allowing Western countries to interfere in the internal affairs of the Soviet Union. And in itself, he did not give the USSR any benefits, since the FRG was very, very much weaker than the USSR, and the treaty only untied Bonn’s hands and bound the USSR.

West thought of everything. The USSR could not fail to sign a treaty in which the FRG officially recognizes the post-war borders in Europe, does not lay claim to the Kaliningrad region, and recognizes the border along the Oder-Neisse. The Federal Republic of Germany recognized the post-war Polish borders, that is, the Poles ’ownership of the land, which the Red Army seized from the Red Army in Germany and was transferred to Poland by the USSR government, despite objections from the United States, Britain and France.

It must be said that Poland does not remember the independence granted to it by the Soviet Republic after the revolutions of 1917, or the transfer of land to it by the Soviet Union in 1945. Poland prefers to hate us, as the Western world hates us. Germany removed the claims of Germany on these lands. Historically they really belonged to Poland. West Germany went further and 21 in November 1972 of the year recognized the GDR, and in 1973, the Federal Republic of Germany and Czechoslovakia denounced the Munich agreement.

These treaties were no doubt initiated by West German Chancellor Willy Brandt, who could not take a step without the permission of the United States. But the United States thought everything over and were firmly convinced that the USSR would sign an agreement with any reservations to confirm the inviolability of the postwar borders. So it happened.

The next step in giving the treaties the format of international law was the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The meeting will later grow into the Organization for Cooperation and Security in Europe (OSBE).

It was here that the United States and Canada joined the negotiation process with a “humanitarian package”. The meeting took place from 1973 to 1975 years, first in Helsinki, then in Geneva and then again in Helsinki. The final act of the meeting was signed on 1 August 1975 by the heads of 33 European states, as well as the USA and Canada. The signatory countries established and approved the most important principles of international law, including behavior in the European and world arena.

In addition to peaceful assurances, the principles of non-use of force, respect for sovereignty, there was also a “Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms” clause. This item, under the guise of protecting human rights, gave the United States the right to interfere in the internal affairs of any country. Such intervention was later called “humanitarian intervention.”

In the 21st century, the United States added the fight against terrorism to the primacy of the overvalued “human rights”, finally unleashing its hands on the path to world domination or, as they say now, to globalization.

Signed on 1 on August 1975, the above act dealt another blow to the USSR. The Americans proclaimed democratization and human rights as the main goals of US foreign policy and they covered their aggressive intentions and actions. They were complemented by the previously proclaimed goals of US foreign policy - national security and trade. The act was interpreted as the right of peoples to self-determination.

This strike, of course, was much weaker than an enemy strike with a lie about mass Stalinist repressions, but along with a lie about our agriculture, 1930, military and post-war times destroyed the Soviet Union, like many different bombs, shells, mines, grenades and bullets destroyed the beautiful cities and villages of the USSR during the Great Patriotic War 1941-1945 the Nazis. The Americans continued the work of the Hitler hordes defeated by the Red Army, but in a different way.

In some cities of the Soviet Union, very homogeneous “Helsinki groups” were formed, which allegedly monitored the fulfillment of Helsinki commitments. These groups transmitted their observations abroad, and there they printed and replicated information on alleged human rights violations in the USSR through all media channels.

They were approached by representatives of the 5 column, whom the Soviet government, in accordance with the laws of the country, began to prosecute for committing unlawful acts. They were approached by Jews who did not receive permission to emigrate, Crimean Tatars who wanted to give the Crimea to the Turks, Meskhetian Turks, Catholics, Baptists, Pentecostals, Adventists and other people opposed to the USSR.

Thus, the internal enemies of Russia received international legal status to fight with our country. And the document giving legitimacy to the destroyers of the USSR was signed by the head of the Soviet Union. This is what political myopia leads to. The ingenious politician J. V. Stalin would not allow this to happen. Yes, we had the strength, and the Brezhnev leadership skillfully developed the country, but there was not enough political far-sightedness.

The members of the CPSU Central Committee A. N. Shelepin and P. E. Shelest understood what the United States was leading and expressed their opinions. But certain political circles influenced L. I. Brezhnev, and in 1976, both of the indicated opponents of the pro-American course were withdrawn from the Central Committee of the CPSU.

29 May 1972 in Moscow R.Nixon and L.I. Brezhnev signed an agreement on the limitation of strategic weapons (SALT-1), as well as an agreement on the limitation of antimissile defense (ABM).

In addition, documents were signed on Soviet-American cooperation in commerce, science, education, space exploration. No wonder R. Nixon flew to Moscow and became a "friend" of the USSR. He flew in the 1974 year, and L. I. Brezhnev flew to America. In 1974, L. I. Brezhnev met in Vladivostok with the new US President D. Ford. An agreement was reached on concluding a new strategic arms limitation treaty (SALT-2).

Thus, in three years the American presidents arrived in the USSR three times. Only this fact should have alerted the leadership of the Soviet Union. But no, I did not alert.

The members of our government should have been aware of the statements of Nixon, who said that the main interest of the United States was to do what the USSR would most harm. The Soviet government and L. L. Brezhnev personally were not warned about Nixon’s intentions. The responsibility for this lies with the chairman of the USSR State Security Committee (KGB), Yu. V. Andropov.

The Soviet leadership could study and understand the intentions of the West, first of all, through the KGB services, but they were inactive and thus did not protect the interests of their homeland, did not interfere with the reduction of its security. Our members of the government did not know and did not understand much and, therefore, again signed treaties detrimental to the Soviet Union.

And it was clear that the leaders of the United States flew to the USSR from the fear of day by day by the growing might of the USSR. It was necessary to immediately contain the growth of military power of our country, because the United States lagged far behind us in the quantity and quality of strategic weapons.

America lacked a scientific and technical level in the nuclear-missile areas, and it was losing the arms race in creating the most complex and decisive outcome of the war of strategic weapons. In the field of strategic weapons, it could fall behind forever and thus lose the cold war. In fact, she was already losing her.

That's why President Nixon measured his pride, boarded a plane and flew to Moscow. The SALT-1 agreement, signed by the Soviet side, America limited the number of missiles with nuclear warheads to 1300 units. For us, the first treaty meant curtailing the production of strategic missiles, and for America, the opportunity to catch up with us.
Author:
Originator:
http://zavtra.ru/content/view/katastroficheskie-oshibki-pravitelstva-sssr-vo-vneshnej-politike/
98 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. EvgNik
    EvgNik April 30 2016 05: 36
    +30
    This is what political myopia leads to. The ingenious politician I.V. Stalin would not allow this.
    And that says it all.
    1. dkflbvbh
      dkflbvbh April 30 2016 21: 10
      +2
      I didn’t understand why the minuses came across an article ???
      There are no other buttons on the keyboard ???
      1. yehat
        yehat 4 May 2016 15: 27
        +1
        for bias!
        I read and talked a lot with people who traveled abroad. Well, there wasn’t such a thing — the whole world conspiracy against the USSR. That wasn’t! Moreover, the existence of the USSR made the west be better. YES, there was agitation, ideology, etc., but not total.
        Yes, there were misfires and mistakes, not without it, but firstly, I would have estimated it differently than in the article, and secondly, there were a lot of errors inside as well as in organizing trade in the CMEA.
        Finally, Maslovsky deliberately ignores the fact that the arms race was not needed by the USSR in the forced form that it was.
  2. Uncle Murzik
    Uncle Murzik April 30 2016 05: 55
    +6
    it's time to understand there are no friends in politics, there are partners! and relations should be built on a mutually beneficial basis
    1. Pavel Koltunov
      Pavel Koltunov 1 May 2016 00: 46
      +2
      You write: "... relationships should be built on a mutually beneficial basis"
      In relations, the interests of the country should be defended (defended), not profit!
  3. Serg65
    Serg65 April 30 2016 06: 42
    +33
    Article put a minus! "Catastrophic mistakes of the USSR government in foreign policy"The country has lived for 18 years without the frills inherent in comrade Khrushchev and subsequently for comrade Gorbachev, and not only lived, but developed! All of the above international treaties were primarily needed by the USSR, they were needed in order to raise the economy in a peaceful environment, improve after the previous reforms, the state of the army and navy.In fact, it was under Brezhnev that the post-Stalinist USSR became one of the leading powers, therefore the Americans were kind to the General Secretary.The statement that the Politburo, through the fault of Andropov, was not informed about the dirty tricks of the Americans is, to put it mildly, complete nonsense ! The KGB had a competitor in the person of the GRU and the information was complete through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As for me, this article is a set of phrases designed for deletants.
    1. EvgNik
      EvgNik April 30 2016 07: 00
      -3
      Quote: Serg65
      The country lived for 18 years without the tricks inherent in T. Khrushchev and subsequently T. Gorbachev and not just lived, but developed!

      And that is why those times were called stagnation. And even before Gorbachev.
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 April 30 2016 07: 17
        +15
        Quote: EvgNik
        And that's why those days were called stagnation.

        Who called it? Dissidents dreamed of jeans, whiskey, dollars falling from the sky and the rest of the beautiful "American" life, and even grabbing officials who did not know how to legalize naturalized capital!
        1. Orang
          Orang April 30 2016 07: 40
          +5
          Quote: Serg65
          grabber officials

          just the product of stagnation, in the previous era they were not very comfortable.
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 April 30 2016 08: 07
            +6
            Quote: Orang
            just the product of stagnation, in the previous era they were not very comfortable.

            Oh come on! I beg you, grabbers have always been! And under Alexander the Liberator, and under the bloody Nicholas, and under military communism, and under Stalin's industrialization. True, what a sin to conceal during the Khrushchev thaw, these gentlemen, comrades bully
            1. Orang
              Orang April 30 2016 09: 50
              +2
              Quote: Serg65
              grabbers were always

              Yes, only they were systematically blurted out, and with the kindest (without sarcasm) Leonid Ilyich they began to dissolve. Well, you yourself noted that. Perhaps Brezhnev simply overstrained. The young years fell on hard times, industrialization, war, recovery from the war. At the time, the level of responsibility of the leader of his level is known. When the situation stabilized, I decided that everything was done and you can relax.
              1. Serg65
                Serg65 April 30 2016 10: 49
                +5
                Quote: Orang
                and with the kindest (without sarcasm) Leonid Ilyich began to dissolve

                Andrey, I don’t know how old you are, but under the “kindest” process, the houses confiscated from officials and shop assistants were not distributed among themselves, but turned into orphanages, libraries and young technicians' houses! And OBKHSS was a nightmare for traders, warehouse managers and other service workers!
                1. Nekarmadlen
                  Nekarmadlen April 30 2016 11: 27
                  +2
                  It’s just that during a stagnation, a corrupt official or guild could build a palace (as it is now on Rublevka), which could be confiscated and turned into an orphanage or library)))) .... It was forbidden to build summer houses above one or two floors .. .. If only in Central Asia or in the Caucasus ....
                  1. gladcu2
                    gladcu2 April 30 2016 17: 01
                    0
                    During the stagnation, there were no corrupt officials. :) There were no private entrepreneurs and businessmen therefore corruption could not be. :)

                    There were fools, scoundrels and careerists. But these did not do as much harm as corrupt officials.
                2. Orang
                  Orang April 30 2016 11: 43
                  +7
                  Offhand: guilds, the coalescence of power and organized crime in the republics of Transcaucasia and Central Asia. It was? It was. Where did the roots of the mafia blooming with a bad color in the 90s come from? From that time.

                  Awkward propaganda, remember the propaganda stands in the military registration and enlistment offices of that time. On one side "Guarding the World"; three fat men with a banner swear of something, an Uzbek construction battalion soldier is reading Lenin, soldiers are planting trees, a parade attack along the line.
                  On the other, "Warmongers" They looked much more interesting: muscular brutes, hung with weapons, aircraft carriers with aggressively painted planes. Let's add here the chief of the 2nd department, Major Baran, who fully justifies his name and we get the opposite effect to the expected effect.
                  I am 46, but I was in the military enlistment office from the 80th with my mother, she went there for work and hung at the stand for a long time.
                  You list the positive aspects of that era, I completely agree with this, only the momentum received by the country in 30-50, dried up exactly that time. Perestroika foremen also not brought from Mars
                  1. alicante11
                    alicante11 April 30 2016 13: 04
                    0
                    Where did the roots of the mafia blooming with a bad color in 90 come from? From that time.


                    From "dry law" Gorby. When the moonshiners were covered. Although they began to cover, of course, with the shop workers.
                    1. atalef
                      atalef April 30 2016 15: 17
                      +2
                      Quote: alicante11
                      Where did the roots of the mafia blooming with a bad color in 90 come from? From that time.


                      From "dry law" Gorby. When the moonshiners were covered. Although they began to cover, of course, with the shop workers.

                      Alik, you probably think that he lived alone in those years.
                      Gorbach’s dry law was in 1983 (in my opinion), you will tell me that before that there was no mafia, guild guards, farce, etc.
                      Ask Pitertsev what the Gallery is, who was the roofing guard, under whom the electronics department in Apraksin was, to whom they were unfastened. Everyone knew everything.
                      1. alicante11
                        alicante11 1 May 2016 03: 31
                        0
                        you will tell me that before that there was no mafia, guild guards, farce, and so on.


                        There was no mafia as such in the form of organized crime. Although the beginnings in the form of "thieves in law" were, but this criminal element was always present. Tsekhoviks and farts - there were, and that's what I'm talking about, that everything started with their protection.
                3. atalef
                  atalef April 30 2016 15: 13
                  0
                  Quote: Serg65
                  ndrei, I don’t know how old you are, but with the "kindest" houses confiscated from officials and shop assistants were not distributed among themselves, but turned into orphanages, libraries and young technicians' houses!

                  Come on tell tales to you, no one at that time could build such palaces a priori.
                4. PHANTOM-AS
                  PHANTOM-AS 1 May 2016 19: 33
                  +1
                  It can be firmly argued that the collapse of the USSR is the result of the activities of the West and, of course, traitor agents, in the person of the country's leadership and with the connivance of the GB.
                  All talk about the economic insolvency of the USSR is just brainwashing from the class enemies of the USSR.
                  Indeed, it is necessary to clearly understand that the confrontation between the West and the USSR was exclusively of a class nature, and the rest is a consequence of this very struggle between socialism and capitalism.
                  A huge role in the collapse was played by the gradual substitution of concepts and personal interests began to be put above public ones.
                  It's easier to say, "Die yourself, and help your comrade", began to be replaced by "Your shirt is closer to the body"
              2. yehat
                yehat 4 May 2016 15: 29
                0
                the problem was different - Brezhnev’s environment began to isolate him from real problems
                it was this edited version that caused the "relaxation".
          2. sherp2015
            sherp2015 April 30 2016 08: 52
            +3
            Quote: Orang
            Quote: Serg65
            grabber officials

            just the product of stagnation, in the previous era they were not very comfortable.


            Correctly. They had already stolen money, but could not spend it openly.
          3. alicante11
            alicante11 April 30 2016 11: 45
            +3
            just the product of stagnation, in the previous era they were not very comfortable.


            No, the party nomenclature raised its head precisely under Khrushchev. Because he himself came out of it. And his, of course, did not offend.
        2. trantor
          trantor April 30 2016 16: 26
          0
          Quote: Serg65
          And who called?

          ... and when that name also appeared a big question
      2. atalef
        atalef April 30 2016 08: 57
        +19
        Quote: EvgNik
        Quote: Serg65
        The country lived for 18 years without the tricks inherent in T. Khrushchev and subsequently T. Gorbachev and not just lived, but developed!

        And that is why those times were called stagnation. And even before Gorbachev.

        Hi Zhenya.
        Yes, it was stagnation.
        Nor can I tell you how in the country (in those years) - life gradually slowed down and we all saw it.
        Gradually, goods and products from stores disappeared, lines grew, corruption began, guilds, the word BLAT became the main word, those who knew how to get something - they were on horseback, they all saw how the party kings lived and corporate parties rolled up - don't worry.
        The people began to glance at the western and rightly mk quality of goods, and even CMEA production was an order of magnitude higher.
        And on TV there were continuous congresses, plenums, awards and fairy tales, that every day people live better and better.
        And the people, under these tales, got on the train and went to Peter 2-3-4 for an hour or more and went to make sausages, butter, or anything else.
        And on TV - the next stars of the Heroes of Social Labor. golden forget and kissing in a hickey.
        The top and their inner circle completely broke away from the people and lived in their ephemeral and well-off world.
        With their special rations, outpatient clinics. trips, resorts, institutes and BLAT, BLAT, BLAT - everywhere I opened all doors.
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 April 30 2016 10: 05
          +3
          Quote: atalef
          Yes, it was stagnation.

          You are right, Alexander, store shelves are a vivid indicator of the country's economy.
          And so "Stagnation"
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 April 30 2016 10: 06
            +1
            The same "Stagnation"
            1. Serg65
              Serg65 April 30 2016 10: 08
              +1
              Well, now perestroika, the end of the era of stagnation, and we are moving towards a brighter future.
              1. Serg65
                Serg65 April 30 2016 10: 10
                +3
                The revolutionary sailors who had taken Winter Palace could envy the assault on the liquor store.
              2. EvgNik
                EvgNik 1 May 2016 05: 15
                0
                Quote: Serg65
                Well, now perestroika, the end of the era of stagnation, and we are moving towards a brighter future.

                You know, Sergei, I would prefer an era of stagnation than the one we are going to. Photographs were not an indicator, the main thing was not what was on the shelves, the main thing was in the very atmosphere of that time. A pre-storm lull was already felt. And where are we going now I am simply afraid to express, there are some thoughts on this subject. Especially in the light of some statements by members of the government and its close circles in recent times.
          2. atalef
            atalef April 30 2016 16: 40
            +3
            Quote: Serg65
            Quote: atalef
            Yes, it was stagnation.

            You are right, Alexander, store shelves are a vivid indicator of the country's economy.
            And so "Stagnation"

            You give me more pictures from the book * about tasty and healthy food * bring.
            How old are you ?
        2. alicante11
          alicante11 April 30 2016 11: 53
          +1
          Nor can I tell you how in the country (in those years) - life gradually slowed down and we all saw it.


          I don’t have to tell either. Although I found Brezhnev very few, I was curious and constantly got questions from my parents. How food bottlenecks were decided, and in consumer goods, how aviation developed, where my father worked, well, no. Yes, the problems were, like the situation I had already cited with chicken in Khabarovsk and Petropavlovsk, but they were gradually resolved.

          the word BLAT has become the main, able to get something


          And we did not have a pull, but we did not live in poverty and did not cry. Blat was needed, for those who wanted to show off, to show themselves.

          The people began to glance at the western and rightly mk quality of goods, and even CMEA production was an order of magnitude higher.


          That's right, because that was the policy. The USSR is heavy industry, and TNP is CMEA. And that was perfectly logical.

          And the people, under these tales, got on the train and went to Peter 2-3-4 for an hour or more and went to make sausages, butter, or anything else.


          These issues were resolved. Sausage production appeared. There were no "sausage" trains anywhere except Moscow. The problem was, firstly, in the availability of the electric trains themselves, and secondly, in the best supply of Moscow. For example, my father from Moscow brought our Khabarovsk sweets bird milk from Sputnik, which was problematic to get in Khabarovsk.

          The top and their inner circle completely broke away from the people and lived in their ephemeral and well-off world.


          This happened during Khrushchev's time. Remember Novocherkassk. It started there with just such a redneck-director who "came off".
          1. atalef
            atalef April 30 2016 15: 45
            -1
            Quote: alicante11
            I don’t have to tell either. Although I found Brezhnev very few, I was curious and constantly got questions from my parents

            In which city did he live?
            Quote: alicante11
            Yes, there were problems, like the situation I had already cited with chicken in Khabarovsk and Petropavlovsk, but they were gradually solved

            Look at my humpbacked sculptures, 1977 year, Mr. Nelidovo (Kalinin region), 250 km to Moscow
            There is nothing in stores except
            Writing bone, pollock, canned seaweed, sprat and vodka, and even gray pasta.
            Milk - 2 times a week, eggs - once a week.
            One could not even dream of such things as sausage, meat, butter, on a train night. Moscow and in the evening with full bags home.
            Moving to Peter. I was incredibly surprised by the presence of oil, fish, and sometimes meat and sausages in the store. But to 1980-81 and it was gone.
            So no fairy tales.
            In the regional centers, as it was, in the regional centers - less, and the regions themselves - you did not grow in the garden - you will stretch fins out of hunger
            Quote: alicante11
            And we did not have a pull, but we did not live in poverty and did not cry. Blat was needed, for those who wanted to show off, to show themselves.

            Again blah blah - blah and fairy tales. Yes, it's funny to listen.
            The fact that they did not cry - I believe, but it does not change the picture
            Quote: alicante11
            That's right, because that was the policy. The USSR is heavy industry, and TNP is CMEA. And that was perfectly logical.

            What is right ? Pull a blast furnace on yourself? I would also understand if CMEA provided, and so it was not to get
            Quote: alicante11
            These issues were resolved.

            How do you know, then you were a child
            Quote: alicante11
            There were no "sausage" electric trains anywhere except Moscow

            tell these tales to another. all regional centers were surrounded by these sausage trains
            Quote: alicante11
            For example, my father from Moscow brought our Khabarovsk sweets bird milk from Sputnik, which in Khabarovsk was difficult to get

            contradicting yourself
            1. alicante11
              alicante11 1 May 2016 03: 45
              0
              In which city did he live?


              In the same as now - in Khabarovsk.

              Look at my humpbacked sculptures, 1977 year, Mr. Nelidovo (Kalinin region), 250 km to Moscow
              Moving to Peter. I was incredibly surprised by the presence of oil, fish, and sometimes meat and sausages in the store. But to 1980-81 and it was gone.


              You don't have to sculpt a hunchback. My father flew to the north on business trips and brought in such clothes and food products that were not seen in Khabarovsk. I repeat, when I went to kindergarten, we were considered "traveling" on the basis of how they dressed me.

              Again blah blah - blah and fairy tales. Yes, it's funny to listen.
              The fact that they did not cry - I believe, but it does not change the picture


              Well, I’m far from your blah blah.
              What picture does not change? I say that the blat was not important and widespread. Only those who wanted to show off used it.

              What is right ? Pull a blast furnace on yourself? I would also understand if CMEA provided, and so it was not to get


              Let's not lie. If we talk about clothes, CMEA provided, let us say, a premium class. An example, although not entirely correct, but by ear, were Indian jeans. At the same time, Khabarovsk also had its own sewing factory, which sheathed not only the city, but also the southern regions of the region. Until now, the bus stop is called that.

              tell these tales to another. all regional centers were surrounded by these sausage trains


              Do not lie, there were no electric trains in Khabarovsk. Even in the 90, suburban trains were allowed out of old reserved seats.

              How do you know, then you were a child


              I already said that I was a very inquisitive child and asked parents and other older comrades.


              contradicting yourself


              I do not contradict. It was a premium product. And I illustrate the best supply of Moscow.
              1. EvgNik
                EvgNik 1 May 2016 05: 01
                0
                Quote: alicante11
                My father flew to the north on business trips and brought such clothes and such groceries

                That's just the point, that in the north. Not all regions were provided equally. For motorcycles "Ural" went to Riga, where they were freely sold.
                Quote: alicante11
                Until now, the bus stop is called.

                One of our stops is still called the "old militia", it was demolished 40 years ago. Two generations of children have grown up who have never seen her. How is the garment factory doing?

                Quote: alicante11
                I already said that I was a very inquisitive child and asked parents and other older comrades.

                I, too, was curious and asked how they lived before the revolution. It turns out to be very good (according to those who recall).
                1. alicante11
                  alicante11 1 May 2016 09: 38
                  0
                  That's just the point, that in the north. Not all regions were provided equally. For motorcycles "Ural" went to Riga, where they were freely sold.


                  And now they drive cars in Primorye, at least to Ussuriysk, at most to Vladik. And even to Japan.
                  Logistics, however, is a big country. But the main thing was everywhere.

                  One of our stops is still called the "old militia", it was demolished 40 years ago. Two generations of children have grown up who have never seen her. How is the garment factory doing?


                  At one time there was a Chinese flea market, now there are boutiques. I was talking about Soviet times, and not about what is now.

                  I, too, was curious and asked how they lived before the revolution. It turns out to be very good (according to those who recall).


                  The question "bad is not bad" is a somewhat subjective indicator. And I don’t give estimates, but I’m talking about specific moments of the economy and life, which I remember either myself or learned from adults.
                2. yehat
                  yehat 4 May 2016 15: 45
                  0
                  Many nat. republics lived on credit. The Balts were especially spoiled - they had literally everything. For example, the fact that Pepsi or great could be bought in stores seemed to me a fairy tale. However, I am sure that not less than half of the problems were the result of direct corruption in trade organizations. I saw all this - how the products and the deficit were distributed among mine, received a lot of money with kickbacks for the deficit.
                  Another problem was that the leaders of cities and regions often became frank careerists. It was very dependent on their personal position how well the supply functioned.
                  Personally, I think that fruits on coupons are free apartment and so on. pluses that the state gave. We must not forget what enormous money the USSR invested in infrastructure, in the creation of a production base, and in fact the resources were very limited.
                  Only extortionate foreign trade could afford to live with chic, as the United States is doing now.
            2. yehat
              yehat 4 May 2016 15: 38
              0
              there were absolutely idiotic distortions of supply. for example, in the village they sold scarce greats, but it was impossible to get sausages. It was, but was it a flaw in the system? In my city there was an eternal problem of clothes and shoes, despite the fact that almost any food (except fruit) could be bought in stores.
          2. atalef
            atalef April 30 2016 15: 45
            0
            Extension
            Quote: alicante11
            This happened during Khrushchev's time. Remember Novocherkassk. It started there with just such a redneck-director who "came off".

            Do not say, remember you back in the project
            (like me by the way), and there were no problems in the director, but what
            At the end of May (30th or 31st) of 1962, it was decided to increase retail prices for meat and meat products by an average of 30% and oil by 25%. In the newspapers this event was presented as “the request of all workers” [4]. At the same time, the directorate of NEVZ increased the production rate for workers by almost a third (as a result, wages and, accordingly, purchasing power decreased significantly).

            As early as the spring of 1962, workers at the factory in the body-assembly workshop did not start work for three days, demanding to improve working conditions, and 200 people were poisoned in the winding-insulation workshop due to the low level of safety [5].

            It’s just that the Novocherkassk inhabitants only had enough eggs to raise.
            1. gladcu2
              gladcu2 April 30 2016 17: 21
              0
              Atalef

              The fact that the workers could go on strike, well, they had the right. Well, the country is big, somewhere better, somewhere worse.

              The lack of products in the store also says nothing in itself. Each enterprise had internal grocery stores. Departmental clinics.

              For example, on collective farms there was no point in selling food products. Therefore, there were a small assortment of general stores.

              The device of that life does not look absolutely modern. But it also has a number of undeniable advantages. At least for an example, that the future could be confidently planned.
              1. atalef
                atalef April 30 2016 19: 13
                0
                Quote: gladcu2
                The fact that the workers could go on strike, well, they had the right.

                fairy tales, let's start with a simple one. How old are you?
                Quote: gladcu2
                The lack of products in the store also says nothing in itself. Each enterprise had internal grocery stores. Departmental clinics.

                Tales were, but only at large enterprises and associations. - Yes, and then polyclinics and dispensaries, there were practically no shops.
                Quote: gladcu2
                For example, on collective farms there was no point in selling food products. Therefore, there were a small assortment of general stores.

                In the general store there was no nichrome. And the collective farmer after work had to work hard in his garden.
                Otherwise, you will swell from hunger
                Quote: gladcu2
                The device of that life does not look absolutely modern. But it also has a number of undeniable advantages. At least for an example, that the future could be confidently planned.

                Plan what?
            2. alicante11
              alicante11 1 May 2016 03: 47
              0
              Do not say, remember you back in the project
              (like me by the way), and there were no problems in the director, but what


              So what? Internet to help you.

              It’s just that the Novocherkassk inhabitants only had enough eggs to raise.


              It was a background. But in Novocherkassk, firstly, the local government failed in terms of supply. And secondly, the conflict between the initiative group and the director arose at the plant.
        3. EvgNik
          EvgNik April 30 2016 17: 08
          +2
          Great, Sanya.
          In the garden was all day immediately could not respond. Now it’s interesting to read and see how opinions change. That stagnation was a fact, which, unfortunately, I had to contemplate myself. Someone thinks that it was a joy? You are deeply mistaken. One could see how the nomenclature is increasingly striving to grab as much as possible. Already in the mid-late 70s, the country lived by inertia, and only the blind could not see it. And then, with what was marked, what happened happened, to which the Western world was pushing. Dissidents and the fifth column also played a role in the destruction of the country, but the main role was played by the desire of the elite to join the Western way of life.
          I’m not saying that it was bad, they didn’t die of hunger, there were almost no homeless people (there were those who basically didn’t want a settled life and wandered around the country), factories worked, houses were built and people got apartments. Yes, they lived well, those who are on the site longer - they know my position.
        4. gladcu2
          gladcu2 April 30 2016 17: 11
          -1
          atalef

          Where do you get these tales about the idle life of school nomenclature?

          I lived in one of the regions of Soviet western Ukraine. In my friends I had children of regional party workers. There was no difference at the household level between party workers and workers of local laws. Neither in apartments nor in social benefits nor in salaries.

          When I read conclusions like you, I’m wondering. Maybe in the Asian part of the USSR where there is clanism? Well, there they tried to mix party functionaries from other republics.
          1. atalef
            atalef April 30 2016 19: 17
            0
            Quote: gladcu2
            Where do you get these tales about the idle life of school nomenclature?

            About corporate parties, etc.? I know attended
            Quote: gladcu2
            I lived in one of the regions of Soviet western Ukraine. In my friends I had children of regional party workers. There was no difference at the household level between party workers and workers of local laws. Neither in apartments nor in social benefits nor in salaries.

            Storyteller, how much did the party committee secretary earn? - district committee.
            You speak to Ukraine.
            Quote: gladcu2
            When I read conclusions like you, I’m wondering. Maybe in the Asian part of the USSR where there is clanism? Well, there they tried to mix party functionaries from other republics.

            I do not know what to say. Once again I ask - how old are you?
      3. Damask
        Damask April 30 2016 11: 47
        +2
        Yes, such stagnation will never happen when the whole industry was on the rise, even for every nut and bolt, everything was planned out, everyone knew when and how much and to whom to deliver and receive, warehouses were full of supplies for production, everything was an environmentally friendly product, and not the shit that they’re now producing, for example, 748 kg of products were produced from a ton of meat, and now 1,5 tons of a minimum type of product are made from a ton
      4. Duisenbay Bankankulov
        Duisenbay Bankankulov 10 January 2017 11: 03
        0
        Do not stagnate, but you need a feast !!! After all, everyone had food on the table, and most importantly, it was work and a roof, well, and another 1000 +++++
    2. sherp2015
      sherp2015 April 30 2016 08: 51
      +2
      Quote: Serg65
      The country lived for 18 years without the tricks inherent in T. Khrushchev and subsequently T. Gorbachev and not just lived, but developed! All the above-mentioned international treaties were primarily needed by the USSR, they were needed in order to boost the economy in a peaceful environment and improve the condition of the army and navy after previous reforms. In fact, it was under Brezhnev that the post-Stalinist USSR became one of the leading powers, which is why the Americans were amiable with the Secretary General. The statement that the Politburo due to Andropov’s fault was not informed about the Americans’ dirty tricks is, to put it mildly, complete nonsense! The KGB had a competitor in the person of the GRU and the information went through the Foreign Ministry. As for me, this article is a set of phrases designed for deletants.

      Any friendship with the Anglo-Saxons is the main mistake.
      With vile arrogance, no friendship or understanding.
      If you really "negotiate" then keep a fig in your pocket
    3. gladcu2
      gladcu2 April 30 2016 16: 56
      +2
      Serg65

      You want to say that a treaty can provide a peaceful environment?

      Are you 18 years old?

      The author opened a page in history in which he showed the beginning of influence on the country's domestic policy with the help of "human rights" organizations. And the inaction of the KGB.
  4. 1536
    1536 April 30 2016 06: 52
    +11
    "In economic construction, Leonid Brezhnev did not make any serious mistakes."

    Why such a passage at the very beginning of the article? So that they do not read further, or do not believe what they read? After all, in fact, the following was:
    1. Winding up the economic reform of 1965 of the year begun by A.N. Kosygin, the actual emasculation of its meaning, and by 1979, its complete failure.
    2. The armed forces were preparing for large-scale military operations with the NATO bloc on the European theater of war, from here the military construction to the 1980s came to a complete standstill, both in terms of military science and material support. (Which affected the conduct of hostilities in Afghanistan).
    3. The CMEA policy failed before it even started. But the criminal withdrawal of a part of the industry from Russia to the countries of the so-called "people's democracy" has an effect to this day. And vbuhivanie money for "extinguishing" fires in Czechoslovakia and Poland, too. (Moreover, as a result, aggressive and irreconcilable villains were in power in these countries.)
    4. The planned economy turned into paperwork, the warehouses were littered with useless products, and there were really not enough running things in the trade.
    5. The complete failure of the "Food Program", when not only Tula went to Moscow for food, it was a common misfortune. And this with the presence of black soil, efficient people, machines and agricultural knowledge! (A crime!).
    6. Uncontrolled spending of funds of the CPSU allegedly to support the "international labor movement", their withdrawal abroad and placement in foreign banks. (I would not be surprised that some Apple or "People's car" should say "thanks" to the gentlemen from the Politburo. But those, I think, did not remain at the loss either.).
    7. The disappointment of Soviet citizens in reforms, in the state, in the army, in the police, in all domestic politics, in the socialist idea itself, finally, is a consequence of the above! (Decisions on benefits to veterans of the Great Patriotic War of the 1980 year — a good thing, in general, divided Soviet society. And some veterans today cannot live humanly.).
    8. The foreign policy of Mr. Brezhnev only provided for his treacherous course towards the destruction of revolutionary gains and Stalin's industrialization. And the so-called Helsinki Treaty of 1975, which Brezhnev called "Victory", actually disavowed the results of the 1945 Potsdam Conference. (Controversial? But this is so, if you look into this "pact" in detail, studying the further steps of the Soviet leadership).
    The result - Gorbachev, as the personification of all more than 20 years of Brezhnev's rule and the subsequent "Perestroika", and the death of the USSR.
    No need to compost people's brains. Tomorrow it ends badly! Moreover, today no one makes a bill for "frivolous" mistakes ...
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 April 30 2016 07: 27
      +2
      Quote: 1536
      Winding up the economic reform of 1965 of the year begun by A.N. Kosygin, the actual emasculation of its meaning, and by 1979, its complete failure.

      Expand the topic, please.
      Quote: 1536
      military construction to 1980-m came to a complete standstill, both in terms of military science and software

      What was the impasse and how did this affect the Afghan company?
      Quote: 1536
      The planned economy turned into paperwork, the warehouses were littered with useless products, and there were really not enough running things in the trade.

      And in those days, did you accidentally drop by the warehouses of trading bases and department stores?
      Quote: 1536
      No need to compost the brains of the people

      But in this I completely agree with you!
      1. 1536
        1536 April 30 2016 09: 34
        +4
        Dear, read the sources besides the newspaper "Zavtra" and "A tree in the center of Kabul", remember, if age allows, as it was then in the 1970s-80s. Remember the unadorned and high-calorie buns in the school canteen (by the way, at the end of the 1970s, they were no longer given for free in schools), think about military construction, when they had to steal heat traps from the British to counteract stingers in Afghanistan, when for several months flights of our aviation were stopped when exercises in the army ended at the beginning of a general nuclear war. Yes, there are many other things that led the people to the idea that something needs to be changed, but not all of their loved ones, but in the state as a whole, which ruined this state. And fewer questions, please. If you have something to say, say so.
        1. feniks
          feniks April 30 2016 10: 11
          -2
          Quote: 1536
          Dear, read the sources besides the newspaper "Zavtra" and "Dereva in the center of Kabul", remember, if age allows, as it was then in the 1970s-80s. Remember the unadorned and high-calorie buns in the school canteen (by the way, at the end of the 1970s, they were no longer given for free in schools), think about military construction, when they had to steal heat traps from the British to counteract stingers in Afghanistan, when for several months the flights of our aviation were terminated when the exercises in the army ended at the beginning of a general nuclear war.


          You would at least refer to authoritative sources, and would not drive bullshit.
          1. 1536
            1536 April 30 2016 10: 36
            +4
            I don’t feel like working at the hairdryer, dear. Wrong place.
            I can only refer to myself when I express my opinion, and if you are interested in the opinions of others, then look for authoritative sources yourself, or ask your "authorities". Let them tell you something more reliable, not deceitful and not fake, they can tell you a lot about that time. Only in truth, no show-off.
        2. Serg65
          Serg65 April 30 2016 10: 43
          +4
          Quote: 1536
          . And fewer questions, please. If you have something to say, say so.

          Eugene, of course, what can I say! Age allows me to remember how everything was wink ... I went to school in 72nd. it was just the dawn of "Stagnation" and I can tell you how they were treated without cronyism, they entered the university without cronyism and money, how they went to a pioneer camp almost for nothing, how parents rested on the same line at resorts. Let me tell you that a plane ticket from my native Frunze to Simferopol cost 72 rubles, and to Moscow 35 rubles (with the salary of my father, a joiner, 150 rubles). I’ll tell you how at the age of 12 I ONE went to Barnaul (2 days drive) and my parents were not afraid to let me go. I'll tell you how factories worked in 3 shifts, and parasites were imprisoned for 3 years for unwillingness to work. What else to tell you ... yes, a lot of factories were built.
          Quote: 1536
          when it was necessary to steal heat traps from the British to counter stingers in Afghanistan,

          My dear. stole everything from each other! After the Powers shot down, the Americans hunted for the S-75 air defense system for a very long time, but this does not mean their technical backwardness!
          Quote: 1536
          when military exercises ended at the start of a general nuclear war

          But about the doctrine is not necessary! I spent a lot of time in the exercises, such exercises as Ocean-70, 75, 83., West-81, Shield-82, Caucasus-85, there are hardly any such exercises.
          Quote: 1536
          which ruined this state

          The state ruined the gluttony of the Young Party hi
          1. Orang
            Orang April 30 2016 12: 40
            +4
            Quote: Serg65
            The state ruined the gluttony of the Young Party

            Here! They did not cope with the same humpback and others, but in order to weed out it was necessary to identify, and the system no longer allowed, a caste of celestials arose. At the congresses they sang hosanna to socialism and personally to Leonid Ilyich and normally, if only there was no war. The result is known, we lost our country and still have not found it.
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 April 30 2016 16: 41
              +4
              Yes, and I will add, with permission, 1536. Every year, starting from the 2nd grade, we went to Starodubtsev's farm for potatoes, beets, carrots, cleaned the cowsheds, and swept the elevators. Most of the production, including sausage, went to Moscow. That is, your damn Moscow was fed by all the neighboring regions, leaving little in place. And, then, every month, we got on these same sausage trains, and heard disgruntled hiss: "come in large numbers." Some party members came to their senses, including Starodubtsev, who became a member of the State Emergency Committee, and who promised everyone 15 acres, but it was too late. Previously, one had to think when it was easier to build a monument to Lenin 10 meters in his state farms than a house for a tractor driver.
              1. 1536
                1536 1 May 2016 18: 25
                0
                Dear, you decide in the end. Either you defend Brezhnev, or you admit what I said in the main report. Alas, no third is given. I will wait until you have the number of statements, finally, will turn into quality. It’s interesting and easy to talk with you.
          2. EvgNik
            EvgNik April 30 2016 17: 30
            0
            Quote: Serg65
            as if on a trade union line, almost for nothing went to a pioneer camp, as parents rested on the same line in the resorts

            On the trade union line, I, who received serious injuries at the plant, was entitled to free trips to the resort once every three years - they did not give me even once, the employees of the department traveled along them. And they offered me paid ones. First came to the resort when the union was taken away the privilege to distribute permits.
          3. 1536
            1536 1 May 2016 18: 21
            0
            The above analysis of all my statements even more assured me that the USSR was killed precisely because someone in 1972 went to school, but that he comprehended there only appeared in 1992. Alas, there were many.
            Dear, I will tell you this. I don’t know where and how you lived, but you feel some kind of detachment from what was actually happening in the country. Well, you didn't have reliable information. Some "Arguments and Facts", but the stories of the political officer. This is not your fault, it is your trouble. I will not enter into polemics with you about exercises in the army. Not all fighters were informed about what was invented and laid out at headquarters. And thank God. But I also remember the Center-82 exercises, since I myself took part in them. Don't strain yourself. These were the largest CSUs that year. "Shield-82", in my opinion, was carried out in Belorussky Machulishche at the SVD air defense command post. It was fun too. That was a long time ago. In another country.
            As for Afghanistan, I also talked about traps using my personal experience, knowing how they were obtained. And our industry simply did not do this. They did not think that there would be such a war. Is not it so?
            Therefore, let's close this topic, and we will not call each other either "cutest" or "village idiots".
  5. V.ic
    V.ic April 30 2016 06: 59
    +3
    Historically, they really belonged to Poland. Author Leonid Maslovsky

    Historically, the entire Baltic coast east of present-day Denmark a thousand years ago belonged to the Slavs. In the Czech Republic, by the way, after the burning of Jan Hus, for some reason the Czech students "gave pepper" to the "Poles" students, who, according to LN Gumilev, were ethnic Germans who had just arrived for training from POLISH lands. Unambiguously to assert that the lands on the right bank of the Oder were precisely Polish, I would not, where Mazovia and Cracovia and where the Oder ...
    By the way, the Polish prince Konrad Mazowiecki invited the Teutonic knights, who had recently been expelled from the borders of Hungary by King Endre II (1205-1235) in shame, to the Chelminsky land to help him against the raids of the Prussians. The Prussians, for those who do not know, were a Slavic tribe, although they were pagans, which was very disliked by the "pious" Catholics / Poles /. Love "Panov" to invite all kinds of evil spirits.
  6. Valery Valery
    Valery Valery April 30 2016 07: 01
    +1
    In my opinion, foreign policy should be built on the basis of a simple conclusion: the main enemies of our state are the Anglo-Saxons. Therefore, any proposal must be refused. On any!
    1. iouris
      iouris April 30 2016 12: 57
      +2
      It is believed that the main enemy is inside you (I do not say that there are only friends around).
      One person could not have made "catastrophic mistakes in foreign policy." In addition, it seems that some believe that our entire history consists of catastrophic mistakes.
      Yes, an analysis of Brezhnev’s reign is necessary, but a scientific analysis.
      With the Anglo-Saxons, the situation is this: neither we without them, nor they without us.
      They own the technology that we sometimes need. They are counting on our cheap raw materials. It is necessary to develop those technologies that they do not yet have, and they cannot do without our raw materials.
      There is a chance for us in this contradiction.
  7. Koshak
    Koshak April 30 2016 07: 30
    +2
    And what will they say about 90x -2000x years through 40-50?
    1. V.ic
      V.ic April 30 2016 10: 57
      +3
      Quote: Koshak
      And what will they say about 90x -2000x years through 40-50?

      This is how the Knesset will decide ... By the way, the range of 1990 years you have indicated does not bother you?
    2. alicante11
      alicante11 April 30 2016 12: 21
      +2
      And what will they say about 90x -2000x years through 40-50?


      The 90s and 2000 are different periods. 90s the collapse of the country and the primary accumulation of capital, Vasya Vasya with the West. But after 96 the situation began to change and by the 2000s our oligarchs came up with the idea of ​​"sovereign democracy". This predetermined certain improvements in the economy, and over time, after the war of the three eights, when it became clear that one economy, the more one-sided, we would not defend ourselves from the West, there were also advances in the army.
  8. Scud
    Scud April 30 2016 07: 47
    +3
    At the heart of the military and economic power of any state lies ideology. If Russia does not develop and strengthen its ideology, it will develop and strengthen an alien and alien ideology but already in the status of a slave.
    1. gladcu2
      gladcu2 April 30 2016 17: 28
      +1
      Scud

      Understand first what ideology is for yourself.

      When you clearly understand what ideology really is, you will come to the conclusion that a stable state cannot be created on the basis of ideology. Since ideology is an artificial creation and it is subject to self-destruction or rebirth.

      If under the USSR they could create another principle of building a state without ideology, then perhaps the collapse of the country would not have happened.

      Do not step on the same rake.
    2. Morrrow
      Morrrow 3 May 2016 22: 31
      +1
      It is impossible to build a state on ideology. Foreign policy and domestic. politics is possible.
  9. parusnik
    parusnik April 30 2016 08: 35
    +1
    An ambiguous article ... Brezhnev leaked everything ... Yes, it all began under NS Khrushchev ... Brezhnev, there was not that politician and leader who could clean up Khrushchev's "legacy" ...
    1. atalef
      atalef April 30 2016 08: 44
      +14
      Quote: parusnik
      Yes, it all began under N.S. Khrushchev ... Brezhnev was not the politician and leader who could clean up Khrushchev's "legacy

      Brezhnev was in power for 17 years in my opinion - and again the same thing — he couldn’t sort it out after the Khrushchev, then what to blame for Gorbachev (8 years in power) - who couldn’t sort it out after Brezhnev, who couldn’t sort it out after Khrushchev’s In this case, Yeltsin’s guilt is generally ephemeral (9 years of power) and he had to rake behind Gorbachev, who couldn’t rake behind Brezhnev, who was buried in Khrushchev’s jambs, but Putin (16 years in power) - then it will always be an eternal slave on the galleys of shopping malls will say
      Well, how can he rake everything that Yeltsin did, who could not rake behind Gobachev, who drowned in Brezhnev’s stagnation, who failed to rake Khrushchev’s jambs laughing
      How much can you nod (being in the power of 10 or more years) at those who were 20-30-40-50 years before you?
      Listen to you, so in general any idleness and hopelessness can be blamed on (ultimately) Khrushchev.
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon April 30 2016 09: 48
        +4
        My method of blaming Ivan the Terrible
        1. EvgNik
          EvgNik April 30 2016 17: 42
          +3
          Quote: Cartalon
          My method of blaming Ivan the Terrible

          With Ivan the Terrible began the murder of the Russian monarchs by the British. Those who departed from the line of rapprochement with the West. This continues to this day. Although there are no monarchs, the British will always find whom to liquidate with us.
      2. parusnik
        parusnik April 30 2016 10: 46
        +4
        Khrushchev, began breaking the Stalinist system .. He broke .. He didn’t offer a new one .. Brezhnev made an attempt to repair it, plastered there, tinted it somewhere, but couldn’t repair the broken one, Gorbachev didn’t repair it either .. Yeltsin started building, according to tradition the wreckage, from the wreckage, those that got ... But you can’t build good from the wreckage .. Putin, if he was touched, is trying to preserve what is built and improve .. But to improve what is built from trash is a rather difficult and lengthy process ..
        1. gladcu2
          gladcu2 April 30 2016 17: 36
          +2
          parusnik

          Most likely, it is correct to say not about Khrushchev breaking the Stalinist system, but about stopping the development of this system. What exactly Stalin proposed is an article of a separate study. But in vain and in particular I can give an example. Stalin suggested a more powerful development of fundamental science and the correct selection of people according to their abilities is selective. This thing is not political, but as a result of the ban on Stalin, the correct development did not happen.
      3. alicante11
        alicante11 April 30 2016 12: 55
        +2
        Brezhnev was in power for 17 years, in my opinion - and again the same thing - he couldn’t sort it out after Khrushchev’s


        Brezhnev just "raked" it. I could not clean up only the party nomenclature. But here an IVS was needed, which was not afraid to arrange a "37th year".
        1. atalef
          atalef April 30 2016 15: 12
          +1
          Quote: alicante11
          Brezhnev just "raked

          What is the cut?
          Quote: alicante11
          I could not clear only the party clause. N

          Have you tried?

          Quote: alicante11
          But here an IVS was needed, which was not afraid to arrange a "37th year".

          Yes, but actually Stalin created the party nomenclature.
          Gradually, a new mechanism for the selection of managerial personnel was formed and improved. The so-called nomenclature of posts in the state and party apparatus was introduced, candidates for which were approved by the party committees of the corresponding levels [1].

          Stalin defined the requirements for nomenclature in the following words: “People who know how to implement directives, who can understand directives, who can accept directives as their own, and who know how to put them into practice”
          1. alicante11
            alicante11 1 May 2016 04: 02
            0
            What is the cut?


            The economic consequences of the reign of Khrushchev.

            Have you tried?


            Well, I say that this needed a new 37 year. No one decided on this.

            Yes, but actually Stalin created the party nomenclature.


            He did not create, but was forced to rely on her against the Trotskyists.
      4. V.ic
        V.ic April 30 2016 14: 10
        +1
        Quote: atalef
        any idleness and hopelessness can be blamed on (ultimately) Khrushchev.

        Well, the light wedged on your Nikitka! Let's count from King Herod 4th!
      5. Captain nemo
        Captain nemo April 30 2016 15: 42
        0
        Quote: atalef
        in this case, Yeltsin’s guilt is generally ephemeral (9 years of power) and he had to rake behind Gorbachev

        And what about the "collapse of the USSR", or did it not exist and Yeltsin, becoming Gorbachev's "successor", led the USSR along the socialist path to communism?
    2. Was mammoth
      Was mammoth April 30 2016 12: 11
      -1
      Quote: parusnik
      An ambiguous article .. Brezhnev merged everything .. Yes it all began under N. Khrushchev ...

      It started earlier, much. In the 30s. When the party nomenclature began to appear privileges. Further more ... more power, less responsibility.
      Quote: scud
      If Russia does not develop and strengthen its ideology, it will develop and strengthen an alien and alien ideology but already in the status of a slave.

      It is interesting! It is possible in more detail.
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 April 30 2016 13: 06
        +2
        In 30's. When the party nomenclature began to appear privileges. Further more ... more power, less responsibility.


        The ITT had to rely on someone in the fight against the Trotskyists. The party nomenclature helped him defeat the Trotskyists, but, in the end, defeated himself.
  10. Ima tsoh
    Ima tsoh April 30 2016 09: 49
    0
    How greedy are Russian officials and the so-called oligarchy sending their offspring to the west to receive cardboard about education there. Today, science is the same everywhere. But with stolen money this can be done - so these hours and about. reasoning.
  11. Aleksander
    Aleksander April 30 2016 10: 07
    +1
    Those elements of the USSR foreign policy that the author pointed out were important and needed by the USSR and the world in general, because reduced the risk of not just conflict, but uncontrolled nuclear conflict. In addition, the principles of inviolability of borders in Europe were reaffirmed. Wild failures in foreign policy on the verge of betrayal (and abroad) began under Gorbachev and the ebnm.
    Absolutely mediocre and unnecessary policies were in relation to the support of all national movements and the Communist Party, huge funds were thrown in vain.
  12. Nekarmadlen
    Nekarmadlen April 30 2016 10: 28
    +7
    Extremely incompetent article. The colossal mistakes of the Brezhnev administration were economic assistance to foreign ragged people (who had allegedly chosen the socialist path of development) and a military adventure in Afghanistan !!! And the author sees errors in international cooperation with the West ((((((
    1. Orang
      Orang April 30 2016 11: 49
      +3
      Quote: Nekarmadlen
      economic assistance to foreign ragged

      Yes. Especially Africa. Moreover, they could not even pay for the delivered weapons and industrial equipment, adjusted medicine and education.
    2. V.ic
      V.ic April 30 2016 14: 12
      +1
      Quote: Nekarmadlen
      military adventure in Aвganistan!

      This is where such a country? belay
    3. gladcu2
      gladcu2 April 30 2016 17: 41
      -1
      The article is competent.

      You make the conclusions not related to the article.

      Helping tattered people is a separate topic of conversation. And in no way connected with this article.
  13. 1536
    1536 April 30 2016 10: 43
    +2
    Quote: Koshak
    And what will they say about 90x -2000x years through 40-50?

    For some reason, it seems to me that they will not say anything. Either there will be no one, or not until the water in the mortar is crushed.
  14. yahont
    yahont April 30 2016 11: 02
    +5
    As they say, everything is known in comparison, against the background of the economic activities of our government, headed by a respected wink Dmitry Anatolyevich, Leonid Ilyich’s mistakes seem small and insignificant.
  15. iouris
    iouris April 30 2016 11: 49
    +1
    We must warn the inquisitive reader that the method of scientific research is extreme subjectivism or "propaganda". Perhaps this is the result of a spring aggravation.
    All the same, the categorical assessment of the author of the article is striking. But what about the well-known formula: "Chubais is to blame for everything?" (There are other options, by the way.)
    1. V.ic
      V.ic April 30 2016 14: 13
      0
      Quote: iouris
      Is Chubais to blame for everything? "(By the way, there are other options).

      Yes: if there is no water in the tap, that means ...
  16. Alexander Greene
    Alexander Greene April 30 2016 12: 22
    +3
    "In economic construction, Leonid Brezhnev did not make serious mistakes ..."

    Unfortunately, he made a very serious mistake in the socialist economy, which led to the dismantling of socialism in the USSR. He continued the terrible reforms in the economy, allowing marketers to replace the orientation of industrial enterprises to reduce production costs with a focus on cost accounting. Thus, the Stalinist model of the socialist economy was finally destroyed, which was aimed specifically at reducing the cost of production.
    About the Stalinist economy, see the website
    http://proletaire.ucoz.ru/publ/stalinskaja_model_socializma/1-1-0-55
    http://proletaire.ucoz.ru/publ/o_gosudarstvennom_kapitalizme/1-1-0-56
  17. Robert Nevsky
    Robert Nevsky April 30 2016 13: 36
    -1
    Respect to the author! True truth.
  18. King, just king
    King, just king April 30 2016 14: 04
    +1
    The author wrote GOLDEN X (nonsense)!
    1. EvgNik
      EvgNik April 30 2016 17: 35
      +1
      Quote: King, just king
      The author wrote GOLDEN X (nonsense)!

      This is not a royal matter - to swear and condemn the author, without even expressing an opinion. Or is the king just putting a signet?
      1. King, just king
        King, just king 1 May 2016 09: 24
        0
        So, citing each argument - its own, it turns out more than 3 times to fool around. Comment is not for the review article. It is impossible to demonize the United States and Western Europe, why blame the countries for what the USSR was objectively interested in, for example, treaties on NE, and normalization of relations with the FRG. Where did the Soviet people wheat for bread on 22 kopecks. (we have on Sakhalin) received?

        Cursing ... And everyone reads the letter X, to the extent of their depravity.
  19. Hlavaty
    Hlavaty April 30 2016 18: 14
    +1
    for all the time of its existence Russia has never had and never has true friends even among the Slavic peoples


    I did not read further. Lack of friends is a sign of mental illness. The author wants to put his diagnosis on Russia, it would be better if he himself went to a psychiatrist.
  20. Former battalion commander
    Former battalion commander April 30 2016 23: 31
    0
    An article is an attempt to shift from a sick head to a healthy one. All the stupid things that the so-called democrats did after the communists are now taking advantage of the ignorance of the people are being transferred to Brezhnev. No shame or conscience. Loafers and fools who have broken through to power are trying to copy their problems onto others.
  21. gregor6549
    gregor6549 1 May 2016 08: 25
    0
    During the Brezhnev era, a number of mistakes were made that led to an increase in tensions between the USSR and the West, but on the whole it was a time of a fairly balanced international policy combining maintaining the level of the USSR Armed Forces at a level necessary and sufficient to deter any potential amateur "try the USSR on its teeth" try, with a consistent reduction in the risks of full-scale wars with the use of weapons of mass destruction. Among the serious foreign policy mistakes, I would classify the entry of troops into Afghanistan and attempts to keep Germany and Czechoslovakia by force in the zone of my influence. It was not possible to keep everything different, but to get enemies in the face of these countries completely. The policy of the USSR in relation to Poland seems to be more reasonable when the USSR refused to use force against this country and gave Jaruzelski himself to reduce the pressure in the boiling Polish boiler. Well, another serious mistake was the desire at any cost not to allow the Americans to overtake the USSR in any area related to modern weapons, because of which the USSR was drawn into the ruinous arms race, and above all in the area of ​​the Star Wars missile defense system. In general, the period of Brezhnev's rule gave the USSR and its citizens a chance to live in peace, develop and look with hope to the future. And none of the owls of citizens could dream of the collapse of a great country, its humiliation, armed conflicts between parts of a huge country and bowing before the West for petty handouts in a nightmare. And if at that time the national interests of the USSR were understood as really the national interests of the USSR, now they can be understood as the totality of the selfish interests of the mighty of this world of Russia, which fully coincides with the definition of the national interests of Western countries.
    Well, and about whether there was a theft under Stalin. It was also on a very solid scale. True, this theft was completely under Stalin's control and was used by him to shoot high-ranking thieves when the need for them passed. As an example, we can cite the stories with Generals Kryukov and Serov, singer Ruslanova and a number of other "honest" citizens of the Union. At the same time, Stalin himself was an ascetic and questions of personal enrichment never bothered him
  22. podgornovea
    podgornovea 1 May 2016 16: 15
    0
    "America lacked a scientific and technical level in the nuclear missile fields, and it was losing the arms race in creating the most complex and decisive outcome of the war, strategic weapons."

    Complete nonsense!
    Of those cases when it is better not to open your mouth so that they do not screw up.
    Already during the Caribbean Crisis 1962g. both in our country and across the ocean we realized that strategic weapons are not weapons at all decisive in the outcome of a war!
    And only the weapon of "doomsday" after which everything and everyone at all!
    Complete nonsense! We’ll bomb everything in style and we won’t have anything for it, because they "there was a lack of scientific and technical level".
    Well, probably money, it’s not in vain that we tried to overtake and overtake this poor USA crying
  23. SGreen
    SGreen 6 May 2016 17: 32
    0
    Original, but not justified opinion of the author.