Military Review

The devil wears the "Truth." Part of 3

47
Now let's move on to the Soviet lungs tanks BT ("high-speed tanks"), inferior in mass in the Red Army on the eve of World War II only to the "brother" in class T-26. This time we can count on the "expert" assistance of Viktor Suvorov. He evaluates BT tanks solely by their engines (!): “In order not to be unfounded: the war was tank, and the engine was the heart of the tank. The Soviet BT-1932 tank, which entered service in 2, had an M-5 engine with 400 hp. The Germans managed to achieve this indicator only ten years later ”(p. 17); The "outdated" BT-7 had an engine with a capacity of 500 hp, while the most powerful foreign tank engine of that time (the author refers to the beginning of the Second World War), the German HL-120TRM, had only 300 hp. And the “obsolete” BT-7M had not just a heavy-duty engine, but the legendary high-speed tank diesel V-2. No country in the world could create such an engine until the end of the war, all our opponents and allies had to get by with carburetor engines, which is why their tanks burned like matches in a box ”(p. 18).


It is not clear who called BT-7 and BT-7М “obsolete” combat vehicles, because the corresponding “enemy” quotes are not given.

Rezun in one fell swoop "rejects" all tanks with carburetor engines. After all, they are “like matches”! And that means that he and the BT-7 tank "rejects", although in such an attitude he is allegedly "caught" by all the same "Marxist historians" ...

Of course, none of the "high-speed tanks" can not be called obsolete at the beginning of the Second World War, - in the technological and design plans, all of them were then revolutionary machines. Possessed excellent dynamic qualities, and only BT-2 could not "boast" with the power of cannon armament. But in terms of the totality of tactical and technical characteristics, the BT-7 of the 1937 model of the year and the BT-7М (diesel “seven”) should be considered really formidable at the beginning of the Second World War combat vehicles. The thickness of their frontal armor was 22 mm, along the sides - 13 mm. The security of their “predecessors” BT-2, BT-5 and BT-7 of the model 1935 of the year - 13 mm in the main armor plane.

20-mm automatic cannons, with which were armed German light tanks Pz. Kpfw. II, although incomparable in terms of armor penetration with guns on T-26 or BT-5, but still enough to fight most of the Soviet “lightweights”.

In general, the use of tanks by the aggressor must be considered inseparably from his tactics of “tank wedges”, when large armored forces were hit on narrow sections of the front, as a result, numerical advantage was achieved over the enemy. This tactic implied a breakthrough of the enemy’s defenses in several places, followed by his entourage by the units that reached the rear. "Teamwork" of the actions of enemy tank crews contributed to the widespread availability of radio stations on the "pantserniki." In the Red Army, at that time only command tanks were radioed (one tank out of ten).

And now let us devote time to the Soviet amphibious tanks T-37A and T-38, to which I promised to return. We follow, of course, the book "Suicide." Rezun writes: “Let's start with the lightest Soviet tank. It was called T-XNUMHA. Adopted by the Red Army on August 37 of the year 11. Weighed 1933 tons. Crew - 3,2 person. Reservations - bulletproof. Armament - one machine gun DT. Engine power - 2 HP Maximum speed - 40-36 km / h on the ground and 40 km / h afloat "; “T-6A was easy. But light does not mean bad. Does not mean retarded. T-XNUMHA - the world's first amphibious tank, adopted by the armed forces "(again, we are confronted with nameless, but entwined" Marxist historians "); “By the way, the German TI entered service a year later - in 37, the weight was almost the same - 37 tons, the crew was the same - 1934 man, the same bulletproof armor and machine guns. Only he couldn’t swim ”(all three quotes from page 3,5).

The author lied a little in his "comparison". The frontal and side armor of the T-37A tank had a thickness of 8 mm, while the Pz. I (Т-I - the Soviet designation) - 13 mm. The armament of the latter was not one machine gun, but two. The combat weight of the tank T-37А - 3,2 tons, Pz. IA - 5,4 tons. But the main thing is that the T-37A is a reconnaissance vehicle, not a combat one. Therefore, the Rezun's “comparison” is incorrect in general!

But Victor Suvorov can still be understood: the number of armored T-37A swimmers in the Red Army before the war was impressive (2225 units on January 1 1941 of the year), and therefore these cars must harmoniously fit into the Stalinist armored “rink” (23 the thousands of tanks we had then) prepared by the evil Bolsheviks for a bloody world tour. Fortunately, torn off by the "crusaders" ...

The T-37A tanks are presented in “Suicide” as “small toothed predators” (p. 98), and the fact that there are amphibious tanks in the USSR is for Rezun an undeniable “proof” of Stalin’s plans to conquer the world: “If we defend our land, if we are leading a holy defensive war, we do not really need amphibious tanks. We can do without them ”(p. 80); “... nowhere to swim in a defensive war. But if we are leading a holy war for world domination, for driving the entire population of the planet into concentration camps, barracks and labor armies, as Grandfather Marx taught, then the situation changes ”(on the same page).

Quotes from the works of Marx in support of this ad-libbing are not attached ... Typical liberal trampry ...

Viktor Suvorov tells us in plain text that amphibious tanks could only appear in the state that drools on the world map while simultaneously sharpening his big and scary knife. Who could do this, unlike others? That's right, kids - a butcher named the Soviet Union! “And in France there were no amphibious tanks. And in Britain (forgive me, Britain, do not be angry with the truth), floating tanks were not created either before the war or in the course ”(p. 79).

And I, by my naivety, thought that in London, the capital of the British Empire (by the way, in the middle of the 1930's, it reached its greatest size history), sat imperialists. But now I "saw the light": if the "mistress of the seas" had no floating tanks before either World War II or during it, then British imperialism is out of the question! In short, all those imperialists whom the Bolsheviks spoke of were not in principle! In addition to the Bolsheviks themselves.

To be continued ...
Author:
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Black cat
    Black cat 28 May 2016 12: 37
    +25
    But there are people who are on these nonsense. The more impudent a lie, the more they will believe in it. The reason to burn in hell, this creature belongs to the highest degree of abomination.
    1. Asadullah
      Asadullah 28 May 2016 14: 11
      +8
      Rezun burn in hell ....


      There is another method of establishing merit. Here in this life, he lives very well. Due to the publication of books, which are mostly sold in Russia. That is, he receives the greatest income, and specifically all the butter for bread, from the one who is crap. I do not propose establishing censorship and waving red flags, but Russian citizens are directly champions in the ability to hide assets abroad, supply the world with black cash, and create ingenious financial schemes. Why not spend a little mental energy, so that the purchase of such a book is equivalent to buying a piece of shit?
    2. siberalt
      siberalt 28 May 2016 14: 59
      +19
      Who needs this Rezun? We read it in the late 80s, early 90s, a different look at the Second World War. With "neponyatok" it was a lot of things (before that there was only Solzhenitsyn). But upon closer examination, it turned out that this is a lampoon on our army and the policy of the USSR.
      1. nov_tech.vrn
        nov_tech.vrn 28 May 2016 15: 23
        +13
        In ALL bookstores, Rezvun’s libel is beautifully designed, and it’s very profitable for sellers to sell this shnyaga, and given the quality of history teaching at school, young people have no immunity against this nonsense.
      2. dauria
        dauria 28 May 2016 15: 27
        +8
        Read it in the late 80s, early 90s, a different look at the Second World War.


        Yes, that's right ... There was a time when the devil had to look for something from what sources. I remember in the 70s I got a book
        German "Such was the underwater war" - surprisingly realized that from the Soviet editions, except for the libraries stored in the reading rooms, and the scale of the "underwater" war is nowhere. Well, and briskly climbed out "historians" in the 90s, earning who what on normal curiosity. Moreover, the emphasis was interesting - not just "You were not told everything," but " Everything is completely different from what the Bolsheviks told you."This was the motto of these individuals.
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 28 May 2016 14: 59
      +2
      Who needs this Rezun? They read it back in the early 90s, as a different view of the Second World War. With "neponyatok" it was a lot of things (before that there was only Solzhenitsyn). But upon closer examination, it turned out that this is a lampoon on our army and the policy of the USSR.
      1. EvgNik
        EvgNik 28 May 2016 15: 27
        +3
        Quote: siberalt
        But who needs this Rezun? Read it back in the early early 90s, as a different view of the Second World War

        This, Oleg, for sure. Personally, one book was enough for me - "Aquarium". I just flipped through a couple more books. And now it is not worth remembering.
        1. engineer74
          engineer74 28 May 2016 18: 39
          +4
          Here it is not necessary to put "Aquarium" on the same level with other "works" of Rezun! stop This book is comparable to the atomic bomb on the effects on Russophobic brains! good Previously, the KGB hid from Dumb Agents, but now they destroy the GRU Special Forces divisions with packs! In other words, quiet harmless paranoia grew into violent schizophrenia! fool
          IMHO, (maybe where I made a mistake with the terms, sorry - not a dohtor)
        2. Volga Cossack
          Volga Cossack 2 June 2016 19: 00
          0
          I agree. empty fiction. but harmful for alas fragile brains.
        3. The comment was deleted.
    4. avdkrd
      avdkrd 28 May 2016 21: 33
      +3
      Quote: Black cat
      But there are people who are on these nonsense. The more impudent a lie, the more they will believe in it. The reason to burn in hell, this creature belongs to the highest degree of abomination.

      I myself read Icebreaker for the first time at the age of 17, in 1989 ... Gorbachev's perestroika (with a little intention) generated not only a deficit (which is attributed to the entire era), but also Rezun's opuses on the free sale. I must say that at that time my characterization was - "he understands the policy of the party and government, but does not support." Such was the revenge of the master of industrial training ... The analysis of Presunov's writings took place later, including in the army (ZGV Germany), where, given my characteristics, they were very interested in how I ended up in the army, and not in prison ... the lie of the defector could only in the early 2000s - the Internet gave other opportunities to search for information. I mean that someone, after reading Rezun in his youth, believes about the aggressive Stalin and the "forced" aggressor, white and fluffy Hitler, about the weak and torn on the part of Poland, about the genius of Western diplomacy, etc.
    5. Alexey M
      Alexey M 28 May 2016 22: 09
      +5
      A few words in defense of Rezun.
      A man has sold his Motherland, and continues to sell. But think about HOW he does it. He managed to find grandmothers abroad and print his books. Books that frighten the western inhabitant to diarrhea. Thanks to such cutters, our information war department may rest, we are already afraid.
      And the fact that the books are lying, but what do you want to write to you with Western money that we are soft and fluffy? The man worked off his grandmothers and quite qualitatively once he has been sucked for 10 years.
      And lastly, Stalin was also preparing for war, because he was the WISE LEADER. But they had time to prepare or not. The question was different. Stalin knew perfectly well that the USSR was a bone in the throat of all capitalists, by the way, now nothing has changed, as we were a bone so it remained .
      1. your1970
        your1970 10 January 2017 11: 25
        0
        The man worked off the grandmother, and quite qualitatively once it has been sucked for 10 years.-Much more than 10 years - over a post above it already in 1989 they read-26 years Lying to everyone, and you can also break off from everyone only by being a virtuoso of lies ....
  2. Banishing liberoids
    Banishing liberoids 28 May 2016 12: 42
    +12
    He’s such a lizun, sits in a landon and ficilyamm watered his former homeland. From him an expert as a composer from a pig.
    1. Ami du peuple
      Ami du peuple 28 May 2016 13: 09
      +10
      Quote: Exorcist Liberoids
      From him an expert as a composer from a pig.

      But Rezun is not an expert at all. He is a propagandist on the contents of Her Majesty's secret intelligence service.
      1. enot73
        enot73 28 May 2016 17: 14
        +6
        Quote: Ami du peuple
        But Rezun is not an expert at all. He is a propagandist on the contents of Her Majesty's secret intelligence service.
        By the way, he is not a very sensible propagandist. There are many lyapov in his "works", and Rezun's arguments about the "aggressiveness" of the USSR are easily refuted. For example, before the war, the "atostradny tanks - aggressors" BT and spare parts for them, praised by him, ceased to be produced altogether, and instead of them the "non-motorized" T-34 and KV were put into production. In short, I advise everyone who has not read it - read this book.
  3. NDR-791
    NDR-791 28 May 2016 12: 44
    +11
    Something I guys do not catch up. The entire Rezun has been painted for a long time, decomposed into molecules and buried not only by historians, but simply by people who think with their own heads. How much can the pearls of this historical corpse be procrastinated? And most importantly - who needs it !!! Well, who benefits? This is like a scandal a decade ago - oh-ah, plans to capture Britain with Russians fell in England !!! Ah, scoundrels, REPENT QUICKLY !!! The General Staff of any country with an army has such plans in relation to its neighbors constantly, and constantly works on its distant neighbors.
    1. Pinkie F.
      Pinkie F. 28 May 2016 13: 48
      +6
      Quote: NDR-791
      Something I guys do not catch up. The entire Rezun has been painted for a long time, decomposed into molecules and buried not only by historians, but simply by people who think with their own heads. How much can the pearls of this historical corpse be procrastinated?

      I support your bewilderment. Even notebook liberals with an echo refer to him as below their dignity. On figs need analysis of this paralytic vomit?
    2. kotvov
      kotvov 28 May 2016 18: 37
      0
      Something I guys do not catch up with,
      and what is there to catch up. Above the kam clearly laid out, books are sold in OUR stores, and books are (in fact) a troll.
  4. Lieutenant Izhe
    Lieutenant Izhe 28 May 2016 13: 31
    +3
    Rezun's positive "contribution" is that he forced to rethink some "OBVIOUS" official Soviet "excuses" explaining the Red Army CATASTROPHE at the beginning of the Second World War.
    PSIt was not the reel, it was just ... the "leader" was sitting in the cockpit! request
    1. NDR-791
      NDR-791 28 May 2016 20: 25
      +2
      The leader sat where necessary. Will you name someone from the Politburo or so who could handle the forty-first?
      1. Weyland
        Weyland 29 May 2016 00: 22
        +2
        Quote: NDR-791
        Will you name someone from the Politburo or so who could handle the forty-first?


        I would put the question even a little differently: Call someone from European leaders who would have done in the thirty-ninth - forty-first? Impudence does not count, they, as usual, the English Channel saved!
  5. Altona
    Altona 28 May 2016 13: 32
    +8
    The amphibious tanks fit well with the concept of "hitting the enemy on its territory", which was popular in the USSR in the 1930s. That is, having met the enemy at the border, we push him back to his own territory and finish off there. The then potential enemies were Germany, Finland and Poland. The theater is cut by small and large rivers. In 1945, boats and bridges during the offensive of the Red Army in Europe were very relevant. In general, we were even able to effectively use "backward cavalry" as a means of disorganizing rear services, communications and supplies. As for the tanks, our designers made good cars. They were made on the basis of the military doctrine in force at that time.
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 28 May 2016 13: 33
    +5
    Rezun is a well-known liar, and this is not about him. The problems of our tanks were not in some particularly weak armor, etc., but in poor combat control (poor visibility, lack of radio stations, the commander acts as a gunner ...). And in the poor training of the crews, due to the extremely low resource of engines and chassis, economy of ammunition and resource of trunks, because of which the crews were trained to land - disembark from the tank, on the spot. Well, the party political work, of course. To be convinced of this, it is enough to find the memoirs of pre-war tankmen, although there are very few of them. In aviation, by the way, there was the same problem. The resource of the M-25 motors for the I-16 in Spain was 25 hours! This was the main reason for the problems of our Asus in the skies of Spain, and not that the fighter was bad. When in experienced hands, the Messers were shot down, it was a nimble machine.
    1. Altona
      Altona 28 May 2016 14: 24
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      The problems of our tanks were not in some particularly weak armor, etc., but in poor combat control (poor visibility, lack of radio stations, the commander acts as a gunner ...)

      -------------------
      Here and remember the words of Marshal Budyonny: "The Red Army is strong, but the connection will destroy it."
      1. 1rl141
        1rl141 28 May 2016 22: 57
        0
        Quote: Altona
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        The problems of our tanks were not in some particularly weak armor, etc., but in poor combat control (poor visibility, lack of radio stations, the commander acts as a gunner ...)

        -------------------
        Here and remember the words of Marshal Budyonny: "The Red Army is strong, but the connection will destroy it."

        How could Budyonny say this? When in St. Petersburg Academy of Communications named after S.M. Budenny? And he was named after him, because he personally had a hand in its creation.
        Maybe not communication will destroy, but its absence?
        1. nov_tech.vrn
          nov_tech.vrn 30 May 2016 23: 02
          0
          Everyone knows the Budyonny Horse-Artillery Academy of Communications, but the quote is completely unfamiliar, although all the pearls of the generals are not given
  7. Timmer
    Timmer 28 May 2016 13: 48
    0
    some bullshit
  8. Pinkie F.
    Pinkie F. 28 May 2016 13: 59
    0
    And in Britain (forgive me, Britain, do not be angry with the truth) they did not create amphibious tanks either before the war or during the course ”(p. 79).

    and Vickers' A4E11 and A4E12? True, the whole series is 29 pieces. The Kuomintang was sold, but this is the second question.
  9. Barakuda
    Barakuda 28 May 2016 14: 22
    0
    I have a bunch of all kinds of Zhukovs, Rokossovsky, etc. volumes, and Kuznetsov .. But do they not lie?
    I'm lying on the carpet, she goes while lying ...
    Here the cutter must be cut ...
  10. black
    black 28 May 2016 14: 42
    +3
    The Armored Academy was created before the war. Her graduates did not manage to become major commanders. I remember reading the memoirs of Rybalko. In 41, he was sent to the front to teach large commanders how to use tanks. The same Budyonny. They were simply handed out to infantry units, like cannons on tracks. Here is such a song.
  11. Air defense SSH
    Air defense SSH 28 May 2016 14: 46
    +2
    Zhukov and the Rokossovsky Victory Parade were commanded, and Paulis, Goodarians and Goebels where and how and why and how much ...
    First of all, the defeated must work on the mistakes ...
  12. VSV
    VSV 28 May 2016 14: 53
    +4
    The "restless" all try to equate Stalin with Hitler and belittle the merits of the Soviet Union in the struggle against the fascist "beast".
  13. megafair
    megafair 28 May 2016 14: 55
    +1
    These attempts to rewrite history, both from the pro-Indian "Lizuns" and from any liberalism, already look ridiculous !!!!

    WE ARE NOT MANCURTS !!!! We remember our glorious centuries-old history !!!!

    And who forgot it - we will not remind them of that - WE WILL REFUNSE !!!!
  14. zyablik.olga
    zyablik.olga 28 May 2016 15: 11
    +3
    I liked this the most:
    But the main thing is that the T-37A is a reconnaissance vehicle, not a combat one.
    wassat Very enchanting.
    1. Retvizan 8
      Retvizan 8 28 May 2016 16: 01
      +1
      In the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army, they were intended to fulfill the tasks of communications, reconnaissance and combat protection of units on the march, as well as direct support of infantry on the battlefield. T-37A
    2. potanot 253
      28 May 2016 16: 18
      +1
      Before "enchanting", I suggest waiting for the next part of the article. After all, as it is not difficult to guess, the author did not cover the topic of amphibious tanks (T-38).
  15. major124
    major124 28 May 2016 15: 19
    +3
    I, of course, not a fan of Rezun-Suvorov, but as far as I remember, he did not "reject" the tanks, but accused those who called the tanks that we had at the beginning of the Second World War - obsolete ..... I did not understand something at all that this author (Vladimir Zainchkivsky) wanted to convey to the reader.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 29 May 2016 00: 36
      +1
      So do I. Denials at the level of a fight in the sandbox of a kindergarten. The author involuntarily more
      propagandizes Rezun, than disproves.
  16. Retvizan 8
    Retvizan 8 28 May 2016 15: 55
    0
    Well, everything is clear here, a person has betrayed his country, his colleagues, that's why he creates a negative image of the country of an "evil monster", because in this way he justifies himself and his act.
  17. andrewkor
    andrewkor 28 May 2016 16: 01
    0
    These comparisons have already been zadolbali, for a knowledgeable person - complete nonsense. Although my colleague faithfully believes everything that sounds from the "box"!
  18. Comrade Glebov
    Comrade Glebov 28 May 2016 16: 26
    +6
    Rezun is a rare brute. First of all, because it throws mud at our Motherland, trying to declare the USSR an aggressor, simply not having time to unleash a war first; secondly, he is a brute because he keeps us fools. When I read this cock at the university, I was all surprised: how is it that a tank is an offensive weapon, and howitzer artillery is defensive? And what about an offensive without artillery, and not only all kinds of "long-range", but also "purely defensive" anti-tank equipment, and what about tanks like the Tiger II, which were intended to defend and shoot their own kind? I would like to be a commander in a war against an army that advances and defends itself by rezun - using only "offensive" weapons in the attack, and only "defensive" weapons in defense. By the way, until 1943 my great-grandfather went into battle on a T-26, burned a couple of times, he himself had 8 enemy vehicles, and only after the Battle of Kursk (he did not participate in it) "moved" to the T-70. So even the Soviet "Vickers" in the right hands could be "evil" and "bad".
  19. sabakina
    sabakina 28 May 2016 17: 48
    +2
    In short, all the imperialists that the Bolsheviks spoke of were not in principle! In addition to the Bolsheviks themselves.

    GAD!
    Remind me in which film the movie character N. Kryuchkova jumped over the destroyed bridge on BT?
    1. avdkrd
      avdkrd 28 May 2016 22: 49
      +1
      Quote: sabakina
      In short, all the imperialists that the Bolsheviks spoke of were not in principle! In addition to the Bolsheviks themselves.

      GAD!
      Remind me in which film the movie character N. Kryuchkova jumped over the destroyed bridge on BT?

      in my own way, too, "Gad" (I have such a login), so I will take the trouble to answer, if not for him, then approximately. Maybe without Kryuchkov, but in the Soviet cinema of those times, a tank jumping over a river or something similar is present as a cliché. Unfortunately, this cliché has migrated into the modern presentation of tanks. The ability of a tank to break away from the surface from acceleration is presented as a kind of achievement .... What the tankers experience when taking off and landing is of no interest to anyone. The layman does not understand that, in principle, any modern tank can "fly" (the maximum speed allows it), but this does not extend its resource in any way and is not part of the tactics (this at least justified such an outrage against the equipment). the film is not comme il faut.
  20. ivagulin
    ivagulin 28 May 2016 18: 16
    +2
    listen, yes you spit on this traitor, he was a jackal jackal, it makes sense to discuss garbage written by order of our enemies
  21. vetor
    vetor 28 May 2016 18: 57
    +2
    The tanks really were no worse. But the concept of application was to hell.
    For example, in the attack on the village and the main loss of tanks from the fire of the birds. The Germans, while exposing the rest of the front from the tanks, concentrated the overwhelming mass of equipment.
    The tigers and royal were more powerful than thirty-four, but by the middle of the war and after this advantage had faded away. Tank armies and talented generals appeared.
    Rezuna per count.
    1. avdkrd
      avdkrd 28 May 2016 22: 52
      +2
      Quote: vetor
      The tigers and royal were more powerful than thirty-four, but by the middle of the war and after this advantage had faded away. Tank armies and talented generals appeared

      Tigers and royal tigers appeared just in the middle of the war. What are you talking about?
  22. demo
    demo 28 May 2016 20: 40
    0
    Especially for the author.
    Excerpt from the "Manifesto of the Communist Party" by K. Marx.
    "... The proletariat uses its political domination in order to wrest from the bourgeoisie step by step all capital, to centralize all the instruments of production in the hands of the state, that is, the proletariat, organized as the ruling class, and to increase the sum of productive forces as quickly as possible.
    This can, of course, happen first only with the help of despotic interference in property rights and in bourgeois production relations, that is, with the help of measures that seem economically insufficient and insolvent, but which in the course of the movement outgrow themselves 12 and are inevitable as a means of revolution in the whole way of production.
    These events will, of course, be different in different countries.
    However, in the most advanced countries, the following measures can be applied almost universally:
    1. Expropriation of land ownership and circulation of land rent to cover government spending.
    2. High progressive tax.
    3. Cancellation of inheritance rights.
    4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels.
    5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
    6. Centralization of all transport in the hands of the state.
    7. Increase in the number of state factories, implements of production, clearing for arable land and land improvement according to the general plan.
    8. The same compulsory labor for all, the establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
    9. The combination of agriculture with industry, the promotion of the gradual elimination of the distinction between town and country13.
    10. Public and free education of all children. Elimination of factory labor of children in its modern form. The combination of education with material production, etc.
    When class differences disappear in the course of development and all production is concentrated in the hands of an association of individuals, then public power will lose its political character. Political power in the proper sense of the word is the organized violence of one class to suppress another. If the proletariat in the struggle against the bourgeoisie invariably unites into a class, if by means of revolution it transforms itself into the ruling class and, as the ruling class, by force abolishes the old relations of production, then together with these relations of production it abolishes the conditions for the existence of class opposition, abolishes classes in general, and thus most and their own domination as a class ... "

    As the author believes, if the so-called "proletariat" (and we know which "proletariat" won in Russia) came to power, will he ever stop on his own, on the crest of successes in one country?
    A good example is an association called the European Union.
    How it all began - the Union of coal and steel.
    How does it end?
    This is a kind of reincarnation of the USSR - "The Second Part of the Marlezon Ballet".
    The desire to drive everyone under their control is very characteristic of a separate nation.
    And when they were then driven into ghettos and concentration camps, they called it genocide.
    Those. Russians, Kazakhs, Uzbeks, and many other citizens of the Russian Empire were confused, with lofty words and ideals, and chased each other.
    The same thing happened in Germany.
    Pseudonation, an outcast people, talentedly put the idea of ​​world domination into the heads of Germans. and drove to kill and die for their ideas.
    So that Rezun does not say, and who does not deny, but to be honest, it would be interesting for me to look at the Soviet Union, which would include all European states - that is, the country "From Lisbon to Vladivostok."
  23. Caduc
    Caduc 28 May 2016 20: 47
    0
    Actually, the first amphibious tanks were created by the British.
    Vickers-Carden-Lloyd A4E11 and A4E12 types in 1929.
    And here is T 37 in 1932.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 29 May 2016 00: 44
      +1
      So with the Vickers and made the prototype T-37.
  24. Vladivostok
    Vladivostok 30 May 2016 10: 00
    0
    Rezun in one fell swoop "rejects" all tanks with carburetor engines. After all, he has “like matches”! This means that he "rejects" the BT-7 tank

    I didn’t understand: Rezun is wrong because he criticizes tanks with CD? or because he criticizes Soviet tanks (although the book talks about foreign vehicles)? or because he is Rezun?