Military Review

Last chance of counterrevolution

70
2 July 1919 in Tsaritsyn, just liberated from the Reds by the Caucasian army of Baron Peter Wrangel, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Southern Russia (VSYUR) Lieutenant-General Anton Denikin read out the directive No. 08878, better known as “Moscow”. In this document, the South Russian White Guard armies were given the task of seizing the Bolshevik capital.
During the summer of 1919 in the south of Russia, the Reds suffered defeats and retreated. The culminating stage of confrontation between White Russia and Sovetskaya was the Orel and Voronezh counter battles, which took place in October-November between the troops of the red Southern Front on the one hand, and the Volunteer and Don armies on the other.

It was then, in the dank autumn days, that whites, more than ever, were close to success. However, the victory was left for the Bolsheviks. Why? It is believed that the Equestrian Corps of Seeds Budyonny, which broke through at the junction of the Volunteer and Don armies, played a decisive role in the success of the Reds. But was this really a decisive contribution to the victory of the troops of the Southern Front? Let's try to figure it out.

Headquarters are weak

The basis of the Volunteer Army consisted of "colored regiments", in October of the 1919, deployed in the division: Kornilov shock, Officer general Markov and Officer general Drozdovskogo rifle. On October 13, the Kornilovites took the Eagle, Markovites approached Yelets, and the Drozdists successfully advanced in the Bryansk direction.

Defending the Eagle, the 13 Army of the Reds actually lost its combat capability. Its commander, former headquarters captain Anatoly Hecker, requested that he be relieved of his duties as commander. By the way, the former General of Infantry Andrei Zayonchkovsky, who commanded the First World 30 Army Corps, who at one time fought side by side with the Iron Division of Denikin, was the chief of staff at Hecker. Zayonchkovsky was unable to prevent the defeat of the 13 Army, which, in general, is not surprising: the venerable general was more inclined towards armchair academic work, rather than planning combat operations. He wrote the fundamental works on the Crimean and First World Wars.

In the 14 th Red Army, which fought in the Bryansk direction, it was led by former Second Lieutenant Jerome Uborevich - the situation was no better. A member of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Army, Sergo Ordzhonikidze, informed Lenin: “Something incredible, something bordering on betrayal. Some frivolous attitude to the matter, an absolute lack of understanding of the seriousness of the moment. In the headquarters of any hint of order, the headquarters of the front - it is a farce. Among the parts, we created a mood that the cause of the Soviet government was lost, you still can’t do anything ... ”

So, 13-I army lost its combat capability and, leaving the Eagle, rolled back to the north. In the headquarters of the 14 army, in the figurative expression of Ordzhonikidze, - a farce. The divisions of the Volunteer Army, inspired by the summer victories, are fighting against them. From the height of the 21st century, the victory of the Reds in those autumn days of 1919 seems incredible. But…

While the whites were breaking through to Orel and advancing on Bryansk, the Soviet command formed the Shock group under the command of former Major General Anton Martusevich to the northwest of Eagle. It consisted of the Latvian and Estonian divisions, a separate rifle brigade and a separate cavalry brigade of Red Cossacks under the command of Vitaly Primakov, the notorious for their looting of the civilian population. This group had the task in cooperation with the 13 and 14 armies to deliver the main attack in the direction of Crom - in the left flank of the Kornilov division. In the middle of October, located in 36 kilometers south of Orel Krom, bloody battles began between the Kornilovites, on the one hand, and the Latvians and Estonians, on the other. Without exaggeration, we can say that this provincial village turned the Russian page in the autumn of 1919. stories.

When analyzing the operational situation in mid-October near Orel, the question naturally arises about the reserves of the parties. Among the Bolsheviks, this is the Shock group, as well as reinforcements arriving from the Eastern front, where the troops of Admiral Alexander Kolchak were already defeated. In October whites had no reserves in the Moscow direction. Operations in the area of ​​Eagle, Krom, Liven and Yelets volunteers had to lead by constant maneuvering and rearrangements of the units operating on the front. Tactical skills and higher fighting spirit still allowed them to win, but the volunteers themselves increasingly felt that the numerical superiority of the Reds was taking on critical dimensions.

Nevertheless, the release of the Shock Group of the Southern Front to the rear of the Kornilovites did not at all force the latter to suspend the offensive. White only changed the direction of the strike from the north (to fifty kilometers north of Orel, Mtsensk, against the remnants of the 13 Army) to the south-west (in the direction of Krom, against the Shock group).

Last chance of counterrevolutionThus, in the middle of October, a curious operational situation developed in the Orla region, when the two strongest groups of opponents — the Kornilov shock division and the Red shock group — were in the rear of each other. And in this situation, not only reserves could play a decisive role, but the ability of commanders to orient themselves in an intricate operational environment.

In general, the view that the one who has more reserves wins is not entirely true. Already in 1907, a prominent military theorist (Major General from 1916), Alexander Svechin wrote: “One of the most important advantages of an attack over a defense is precisely the ability to significantly increase the number of troops operating on the battlefield at the expense of only those present. “The force that is applied in practice is a very small fraction of the existing force” (J. St. Mill). The inactive passive mass represents a round zero, since only really produced efforts are taken into account in combat. The units that are inactive during the decisive moments of the battle do not affect his fate. ”

Unfortunately for the whites, at the headquarters of Denikin did not have a clear idea of ​​what was happening in the Orel region. In a situation where the 13 Army did not pose a serious threat to the Kornilovs and did not have to fear its offensive from Mtsensk, the only correct solution seemed to be the offensive by all the forces of the Kornilov division in the direction of Krom and the defeat of the Red Shock Group. White had chances, especially against the background of successful actions of the legendary Colonel Drozdovskaya detachment Anton Turkul. His detachment went to the rear of the Shock group of the Reds, which appeared between the hammer and the anvil: from the west - the Drozdists, from the south - the Kornilovites.

In addition, the command of the red "drummers" was not up to the mark, as evidenced by Soviet historians, in particular, Angarsk: "The headquarters of the Strike group very poorly organized control and communications on the march. The enemy’s intelligence was almost absent, and the position of the troops was inaccurate. Constantly worrying about their right flank and having an extremely vague idea of ​​the location of the enemy, the units moved unnecessarily carefully and slowly. Only the lack of coherence in the actions between the Kornilov and Drozdov divisions saved the strike group from defeat in the region of Kromy ”(hereinafter my reference. - I. H.).

Angarsky critically assesses the attack of the Reds under the Eagle: “The offensive against the Eagle was carried out by three divisions in the complete absence of any kind of interaction. As a result, the enemy was able to avoid complete destruction threatening him and retreated to the south. ”

The fact that the strike group could not cope with the tasks assigned to it understood the command of the Southern Front, replacing Martusevich with former staff captain Friedrich Kalnins, who immediately asked to send him more reserves. In fact, not with the ability to beat whites. As a result, the enormous numerical superiority allowed the Bolsheviks to push the volunteers back from the Eagle and go on the counteroffensive.

Missing keys to Moscow

And what about Budyonny? His Equestrian Corps on the day of the entry of the Bolshevik units in Orel - October 20 was only moving to Voronezh from the line Usman - Sobakino. Interestingly, in the last days of September, Budyonny, on his own initiative, began to move from the Kazan region towards the right flank of the 8 Army deployed east of Voronezh under the command of professional revolutionary Gregory Diamond (Sokolnikov), while the 3 Don Corps led successfully offensive against its left flank. On the day of the Kornilov's capture of the Eagle - 13 of October, Budyonny begins fighting with Lieutenant-General Konstantin Mamontov’s 4 Don Corps (a significant mass of Cossack corps after the famous raid on the red rear with a huge amount of loot goodness went on vacation to their native villages) and gradually crowded it to northwest. Donets move to Voronezh. October 26 The 8 Army captured Liski, dropping the Don Don 3 corps behind the Don and securing Budyonny's attack from the south. According to the latter: "Exactly in 6 in the morning of October 24, the cavalry corps divisions (4-i - from the north, 6-i - from the east and southeast) broke into Voronezh".

By that time, the Bolsheviks had already taken the Eagle, the initiative passed into their hands. Having lost Voronezh, White expected to stay on the right bank of the Don. Moreover, the situation on the front of the 8 Army remained heavy for the Reds. Her right-flank divisions with stubborn battles moved to the Don and October 25 were in 10 – 15 kilometers from it.

Budyonny recalled the very difficult situation in which his cavalry corps found itself in the last days of October: “After Voronezh had mastered part of the cavalry corps, pursuing the enemy, by October 26 approached Don and began preparations for forcing it. I was very worried about the situation on the right flank of the corps, which remained open. The gap between the Cavalry Corps and the left-flank units of the 13 Army was still very large. ” According to the commander of 3 of the Kuban Corps, Lieutenant General Andrei Shkuro, Budyonny crossed over to the right bank of the Don only around October October.

Thus, when the Kornilovites were ousted from Krom, Budyonny’s final success at the junction of the Volunteer and Don armies was not yet clear. While the Cossacks were on the west bank of the Don, the right flank of the Volunteer Army, Lieutenant-General Vladimir May-Mayevsky (who became the prototype of General Kovalevsky in his Excellency Adjutant) remained secured.

Consequently, the situation in the Voronezh region could not influence the retreat of the Kornilovites from Krom. However, even after the Budennyi divisions crossed the Don, the Reds could not create an immediate threat to the rear and flank of the Kornilovites who were retreating from Eagle. Having occupied Voronezh and dropping the Cossack divisions of Shkuro and Mamontov to the west of the Don, Budyonny did not reach the main point: the 3 of the Kuban and the 4 of the Don Corps suffered heavy losses, but were not defeated.

While Budyonny slowly moved in the direction of Kastornaya, dragging the right flank of the 8 Army behind him, its left-flank divisions retreated to the north. When analyzing the operations of the parties in October - early November, this position of the left flank of the 8 Army was not taken into account by most historians. However, there is reason to believe that it was precisely to the east of Voronezh that the keys to Moscow were hidden. About how dangerous for the Reds was the situation at the junction of 8 and 9 armies, the commander of the Southern Front, former Colonel Alexander Egorov, eloquently testified. According to him, by the middle of October “... on the left flank (8-th. - I. H.) of the army, the situation was extremely unfavorable. The 3 units of the Don Corps developed their initial success, and the 9 Army retreated farther and farther to the northeast and east, dragging the flank of the 8 Army ... the left flank retreating to the north all the time, and the right flank stretched Behind Budenny's corps to the west. It turned out a very vulnerable wedge with a very narrow base, and the slightest failure on the right flank of the whole army (8) threatened with complete disaster. The gap between the two inner flanks of the 8 and the 9 armies was left open by the Tambov direction, and the enemy, more enterprising than the Don army, would have been able to use this gap to consistently defeat both armies ... the right wing of the 9 armies continued to retreat without stopping. ”

This very lengthy quotation of a Soviet commander makes it necessary to take a fresh look at the oncoming battle between the Southern Front and the white troops in October-November of the 1919. The conclusion suggests itself that the fate of the campaign was decided not only and even not so much to the west of Voronezh and near Orel, but also in the area of ​​Borisoglebsk and Talovaya station.

The breakthrough of the Cossack cavalry on the unprotected junction of 8 and 9 armies, the gap between the right flank of the Budenny corps and the actually defeated 13 army, the persistent nature of the fighting in the area of ​​Orel and Krom make it concluded that the defeat of the armies of the Southern front in the last October could become a reality. Even in early November, when the divisions of the Volunteer Army retreated from Orel, the position of the 8 Army was extremely unprofitable for further operational actions by the Reds. The center of the army advanced far to the south in the direction of Liski - the 33-division - was vulnerable from two directions: Bobrovsky - from the east and Voronezh (from Kastornaya) - from the west ... In this situation, the 9-I army not only did not give a guarantee for the strength of the left flank of 8, but, moving to the northeast, substituted the latter for White's flank blow.

Unlucky Denikin

At the end of October, the direction to Usman from Talovaya inspired far greater concerns to the command of the Southern Front than from Zadonsk and Voronezh. All efforts of the 8 Army to restore the position on its left flank ended in failure. October 28 Egorov, in a telegram number 52, reported to the commander-in-chief, former colonel Sergey Kamenev about the abnormality of this situation and asked to put appropriate pressure on the command of the South-Eastern Front to take measures to promote the 8 army. However, former Colonel Vasily Shorin, who led this front, reported on the inability of the 9 Army due to its weakness to help its neighbors.

In this regard, the private defeat that the Dontsy inflicted on the left flank of the 8 Army should not be regarded as a success, but as a major, perhaps decisive, strategic failure of General Denikin in the Moscow-Voronezh area. The defeat of the 8 Army led the Don cavalry to the left flank and rear of the entire Southern Front, which undoubtedly would have forced the red command to transfer additional forces from the Oryol sector against the 3 divisions of the Don Corps. At this time, 9-I army rolled back to the north and northeast and could not effectively act against the Don. Budyonny, in his memoirs, recognizes that in early October, the 8-I army retreated to the east, losing contact with its neighbors. Decades later, the marshal wrote: “The case could have ended for the 8 Army in complete disaster, if the Cavalry Corps did not reach Talovaya in time to counteract Mamontov.”

However, the 8 Army was on the verge of a catastrophe not only at the beginning, but also at the end of October and its defeat did not take place because of the passivity of the 3 Don Corps. Why did the Cossacks behave this way? The answer lies not in strategy, but in psychology. Already in exile, General Denikin bitterly wrote about the ignoring by the commander of the Don Army, Lieutenant-General Vladimir Sidorin, of his operational directives, which require concentration of the main forces in the Voronezh area. You can understand the pain of Denikin, because General Sidorin could in fact maximally weaken the front against the 9 army, which Shorin, commander of the Southern Front, described as weak, concentrating all his forces on the unprotected junction of the 8 and 9 armies.

The success of the Donians near Voronezh and their access to the rear of the Southern Front would make the command of the 9 Army think not about an offensive on Novocherkassk, but about something less pleasant. However, the Cossacks, unlike volunteers, did not want to fight. It was natural. For white officers, the notion of homeland included all of Russia, with Moscow as its heart. So volunteers rushed to the capital, hoping to hear the chime of its bells. In the minds of the majority of the Cossacks, the Motherland rarely went beyond the limits of the villages. By the fall of 1919, they were freed from the Bolsheviks. Because a significant part of the ordinary Cossacks did not see the point to continue the war.

The command of the Don Army felt the mood of the Cossacks and tried, contrary to Denikin's directives, to concentrate forces not on the Moscow direction, but on the banks of the Don and Khopra. This prevented White from winning the campaign in the south of Russia. Then, in October, the passiveness of the Donets and their local psychology 1919 not only condemned the Volunteer Army near Voronezh, but eventually led the Cossacks themselves to the island of Lemnos, forcing them to drink the bitter cup of foreign land.

In conclusion, it is worth noting that since the fall of 1919, white has been fatally unlucky. The passivity of the 3 of the Don Corps and the failure of Sidorin to comply with Denikin’s operational directives prevented him from winning the oncoming battle at Orel and Voronezh. In January, the 1920 th successful actions of the Volunteer Army near Rostov against Budyonny's cavalry were frustrated by a sudden, unconnected with the situation, retreat of the Don Army from Novocherkassk. At the end of January of the same year, the 4-th Don Corps rejected the Cavalry Army of Budyonny behind the Don and the Manych. 8 February 1920, the year Denikin ordered the transition to a general offensive. It seemed that luck was again smiling white. February 20 volunteers returned Rostov. The Reds, in turn, decided to strike Budenny’s Cavalry Army from the Grand-Ducal on Tikhoretskaya. Don command concentrated a strong group to defeat the enemy. If successful, a fracture inevitably occurred during the entire operation.

However, not long before this, a talented Cossack general Mamontov died. The white cavalry group was headed by Major General Alexander Pavlov. On the deserted and deprived of zimovnik steppes, the Dontians moved towards the enemy, hitting a strong snowstorm, from which there was nowhere to hide. Half of the group simply died out and lost its combat capability. This ensured Budyden victory. Without serious fights.

I think Denikin correctly identified the main reason for the defeat of the army he led: "God did not bless the success of the troops I led."
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/31397
70 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Aleksander
    Aleksander 16 July 2016 07: 35
    -6
    The strike group under the command of former Major General Anton Martusevich. She consisted of Latvian and Estonian divisions. in mid-October, bloody battles broke out between the Kornilovites - on the one hand and Latvians with Estonians - with another


    Yeah, without foreign mercenaries- the beasts, the Bolsheviks, nowhere, they constituted the most reliable power of the Reds: they do not mind the killing of Russians, and even for the money.
    It is good that almost all the remaining received full payment: they were destroyed in the 30's as agents of foreign intelligence.
    1. Rezident007
      Rezident007 16 July 2016 18: 45
      +4
      Everyone now has their own truth. What to stir up the past, a hundred years has almost passed ... Nothing can be changed. In our time, half was forgotten as it really was, and the other half was invented ... here, historians and scientists argue as if, supposedly, it would be so if ... What good is the tragedy of the single Russian people, they killed, brother to brother came with a bayonet, a son at his father, etc. It's all terrible. God forbid this to happen again.
      1. kamikaze
        kamikaze 18 July 2016 00: 46
        -1
        and again the Russian winter was to blame for the fact that whites lost the civil war
  2. timyr
    timyr 16 July 2016 07: 47
    +12
    Quote: Aleksander
    The strike group under the command of former Major General Anton Martusevich. She consisted of Latvian and Estonian divisions. in mid-October, bloody battles broke out between the Kornilovites - on the one hand and Latvians with Estonians - with another


    Yeah, without foreign mercenaries- the beasts, the Bolsheviks, nowhere, they constituted the most reliable power of the Reds: they do not mind the killing of Russians, and even for the money.
    It is good that almost all the remaining received full payment: they were destroyed in the 30's as agents of foreign intelligence.

    In what it turns out Estonians and Latvians were foreigners. And I thought that the Baltic states were part of the Russian Empire, and Aleksander gave it independence. To school immediately, ignoramus, bakers all such or only Aleksander.
    1. Mother CheeseEarth
      Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 12: 15
      +6
      Quote: timyr
      In what it turns out Estonians and Latvians were foreigners. And I thought that the Baltic states were part of the Russian Empire, and Aleksander gave it independence.

      Well, in general, the Bolsheviks gave them independence, during the events described, these were already independent states, and the "foreigners" mentioned in the article took part in battles against representatives of the legitimate government, who were defending, among other things, the original integrity of the Russian Empire.
      Therefore, these "Latvians" cannot be called nothing other than mercenaries from states hostile to the Russian people who organized ethnic cleansing of the Russian people on the territory of Russia.
      1. Alex
        Alex 16 July 2016 15: 38
        +6
        Mother CheeseEarth, somehow you get strange. If the Baltic states are legally independent states, then you recognize the legitimacy of the Bolsheviks, and then the Baltic states are foreign mercenaries (if they were paid money) or volunteers (if they fought for ideological reasons).

        But if they fought
        Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
        against representatives legitimate authority, defending, including the original integrity of the Russian Empire,
        then the Baltic republics are in no way independent states and their inhabitants, respectively, can not be considered
        mercenaries from states hostile to the Russian people
        .

        In general, deal with the logical premises, and then slightly remind Natsik: what is beneficial to me, then I say.
        1. Mother CheeseEarth
          Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 16: 56
          +1
          Quote: Alex
          If the Baltic states are legally independent states

          No. It was a natural, unconstitutional separatism.
          Quote: Alex
          You recognize the legitimacy of the Bolsheviks

          I do not recognize the legitimacy of the Bolsheviks, then no one recognized them. In short.
          1917: Russian revolution of 1917
          1917: recognition of the U.S. Provisional Government
          1917: October Revolution of the Bolsheviks
          1933: US recognition of the USSR.
          Quote: Alex
          then the balts are foreign mercenaries

          Of course. Google what de facto and de jure.
          1. Alex
            Alex 16 July 2016 22: 04
            +1
            Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
            Google what de facto and de jure.

            Thanks for the advice (I even appreciated that it is free), but what is de facto and what is de jure I know quite well and for a long time.
    2. Aleksander
      Aleksander 16 July 2016 13: 41
      -1
      Quote: timyr
      In what it turns out Estonians and Latvians were foreigners. And I thought that the Baltic states were part of the Russian Empire,


      It was Lenin's "government" that gave them and recognized their independence back in 1918. And, accordingly, the citizens of these independent (from the point of view of Lenin) states in 1919 were for leninds by foreign mercenariesworking for money. How can you not know basic things? request belay Mercenaries (including the Chinese) guard the gold reserve, mercenaries guard the Kremlin, the Leninists, Bronstein-ah, what "people's" leaders who do not trust this very people. yes
      Quote: timyr
      And I thought

      Do not strain, this is clearly not yours. hi
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Beefeater
      Beefeater 16 July 2016 16: 36
      -3
      Quote: timyr
      Quote: Aleksander
      The strike group under the command of former Major General Anton Martusevich. She consisted of Latvian and Estonian divisions. in mid-October, bloody battles broke out between the Kornilovites - on the one hand and Latvians with Estonians - with another


      Yeah, without foreign mercenaries- the beasts, the Bolsheviks, nowhere, they constituted the most reliable power of the Reds: they do not mind the killing of Russians, and even for the money.
      It is good that almost all the remaining received full payment: they were destroyed in the 30's as agents of foreign intelligence.

      In what it turns out Estonians and Latvians were foreigners. And I thought that the Baltic states were part of the Russian Empire, and Aleksander gave it independence. To school immediately, ignoramus, bakers all such or only Aleksander.

      At that time, the Balts were not part of the Russian state, therefore they were foreigners. Didn't you know that? From the 18th to the 39th. There were also Chinese. In Blucher's convoy in particular. Hungarians were. For the Reds, unlike the Czechs. They have done a lot of trouble. So, ignoramus.
      Then the "red Latvian riflemen" made their way to their homeland. Well, in 41st the crowd went to enroll in the Latvian SS legion. For you, a lover of the proletarian rye bread and an internazi, they are, of course, brothers and compatriots.
  3. Cartalon
    Cartalon 16 July 2016 07: 50
    +3
    Well, Denikin was not a genius, that would be lucky, just a good general.
  4. parusnik
    parusnik 16 July 2016 08: 33
    +10
    For white officers, the concept of homeland included all of Russia, the heart of which was Moscow. So the volunteers rushed to the capital, dreaming of hearing her bells ringing. In the minds of the bulk of the Cossacks, the Motherland rarely went beyond the pages of the villages. By the autumn of 1919 they were freed from the Bolsheviks. ... Firstly .. From the Bolsheviks they freed themselves, as a result of the uprising .. secondly, the Cossacks considered themselves to be an independent state .. both the Don and the Kuban .. And while the volunteers were rushing to the capital .. from the Black Sea ports controlled by " the allies "from the Entente, the stolen goods were exported ... Before the carnation, the Bolsheviks calculated how much and what the Western powers took out during the Civil War, leaving for the Genoa conference .. And then, well, the whites occupied Moscow .. and would go to unite Russia. . To fight the Menshevik Georgia? The Musavatists of Azerbaijan? The Dashnaks of Armenia? With Petliura .. Hardly, "good friends" .. England and France would not give ..
    1. Cartalon
      Cartalon 16 July 2016 09: 22
      -4
      That is, they gave the Reds to the White and they wouldn’t give it to you, your logic has been sucked out of your fingers, the goal of Russia was Russia’s single indivisible and hardly anyone other than the Bolsheviks would have especially hindered it, and the Bolsheviks themselves took out the good with pleasure.
      1. tatra
        tatra 16 July 2016 10: 23
        +4
        From the "Book of Memoirs" by Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich:
        “Apparently, the 'Allies' are going to turn Russia into a British colony,” Trotsky wrote in one of his proclamations to the Red Army. And was he not right this time? inflict a fatal blow on Russia by distributing the most flourishing Russian regions to the allies and their vassals.
        The executors of European destinies, apparently, admired their own ingenuity: they hoped with one blow to kill the Bolsheviks and the possibility of the revival of a strong Russia.
        The position of the leaders of the white movement became impossible. On the one hand, pretending that they did not notice the intrigues of the allies, they called on their barefoot volunteers to a sacred struggle against the Soviets, on the other hand, none other than the internationalist Lenin stood guard over Russian national interests. "
      2. Alex
        Alex 16 July 2016 15: 45
        +6
        Quote: Cartalon
        That is, red was given and white would not have been given, your logic is sucked from a finger,

        Yes, and they did not give red, but only with a recent strain it turned out. From the very beginning, the Red Army did not receive help from anyone, they fought on reserves of PMA and what the remnants of the industry gave. But the "saviors of Russia" only held on to the handouts of the Entente. And this very Entente did not have the plans for the revival of the Russian Empire. And it seems to me, if the volunteers took Moscow, their march would end overnight, and on the remnants of the empire, there would appear two dozen state formations, as independent as the current Shprotia or Ruin with Georgia to boot.
        1. Pilat2009
          Pilat2009 16 July 2016 16: 59
          +2
          Quote: Alex
          and on the fragments of the empire there would appear a dozen two state formations,

          that is how they appeared. The Bolsheviks were only able to return Transcaucasia in the 20s, and the Baltic states in general in the 40s.
        2. Beefeater
          Beefeater 16 July 2016 17: 20
          -1
          Quote: Alex
          Quote: Cartalon
          That is, red was given and white would not have been given, your logic is sucked from a finger,

          Yes, and they did not give red, but only with a recent strain it turned out. From the very beginning, the Red Army did not receive help from anyone, they fought on reserves of PMA and what the remnants of the industry gave. But the "saviors of Russia" only held on to the handouts of the Entente. And this very Entente did not have the plans for the revival of the Russian Empire. And it seems to me, if the volunteers took Moscow, their march would end overnight, and on the remnants of the empire, there would appear two dozen state formations, as independent as the current Shprotia or Ruin with Georgia to boot.

          Why then did the red industry collapse and be content with leftovers? And the reserves created during the war were such that it was enough for three years of civilian life. And everything, almost everything went to red.
          How do you get this white Entente is not needed. So the bet was on the reds. And it was with them that world imperialism also negotiated because it was assumed that the Reds could not recreate the empire.
          1. Alex
            Alex 16 July 2016 22: 02
            +2
            Quote: Beefeater
            How do you get this white Entente is not needed. So the bet was on the reds.

            Perhaps you think that this is logic, but in fact it is demagoguery. The Entente did not stake on the Reds, they fought with them. The Whites were also NOT NEEDED by the Entente, but she used them to fight the Reds. A favorite Anglo-Saxon tactic is to get others to carry chestnuts out of the fire for themselves. And the fact that ultimately they had to come to terms with the fact that the Bolsheviks "took power into their own hands seriously and for a long time" is politics and nothing more. The recognition of the power of the Bolsheviks did not at all prevent them from feeding Hitler and inciting him to the USSR. So, as you can see, the foundations of English politics, laid down by Lord Hamilton, have not undergone any changes.
            1. Mother CheeseEarth
              Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 23: 24
              -3
              Quote: Alex
              The White Ententes were also NOT NEEDED, but she used them to fight the Reds.

              In such cases they say you take too much on yourself.
              The Bolsheviks initially did not represent any force, the Bolshevik state was initially unviable, and it initially did not pose any danger, but rather aroused in the civilized world only a sense of disgust and horror from the fact that the Bolsheviks twisted and turned in the territory of the former Russian Empire.
              But Entente really helped White with what she could. And the point here is not at all the mythical fear of the Bolsheviks (although Churchill was still an anti-communist), but that:
              1. Debt obligations for them were not an empty phrase, it was necessary to at least somehow help the former ally.
              2. On the territory of the Russian Empire then there were a sufficient number of Western enterprises that enjoyed the very profitable investment attractiveness of the Empire. And they wanted to save these enterprises from barbaric Bolshevization.
    2. V.ic
      V.ic 16 July 2016 09: 38
      +8
      Quote: parusnik
      "allies" from the Entente, the stolen goods were exported ...

      It was for this that they needed the Russian turmoil. The American and Japanese invaders did the same. And I don't even want to remember the "brothers" of the Czecho-Slovaks. How much junk looted in Russia was taken to Europe ... Then a Legionnaire bank was opened in Czechoslovakia, adding gold stolen in Russia.
      1. tatra
        tatra 16 July 2016 10: 27
        +3
        Yes, the external and internal enemies of the Communists always, both in the Civil and the Great Patriotic War unleashed by them, and after the capture of the USSR by them, were engaged in large-scale looting of Soviet Russia, the USSR, and the former republics of the USSR.
      2. Mother CheeseEarth
        Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 12: 57
        -5
        Quote: V.ic
        How much junk looted in Russia was taken to Europe.

        Who! Bolsheviks plundering Russia to "fan the fire of the world revolution"?
        These yes, they plundered it gloriously, comparing the economic indicators and the welfare of the citizens of Ingushetia and the "union of the repressed" (I don’t know if people who lived in the USSR can be called citizens, most likely it’s impossible) I want to cry.
        1. V.ic
          V.ic 16 July 2016 13: 53
          +2
          Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
          Bolsheviks robbingth Rosss

          In a nutshell, two mistakes = score 2 (Two)! Which Papuan taught you the Russian language?
          Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
          These yes, they plundered it gloriously, comparing the economic indicators and the welfare of the citizens of Ingushetia and the "union of the repressed" (I don’t know if people who lived in the USSR can be called citizens, most likely it’s impossible) I want to cry.

          If you want to cry, I have no right to object, cry! Here are just your tears - crocodile.
          With regard to the "inflated ..." and the exporters: it is necessary to distinguish between Bronstein / Apfelbaum and their adversary Dzhugashvili. The CPSU (b) supported Stalin. So Stalin punished the asps who traded Russia right and left.
          1. Mother CheeseEarth
            Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 16: 00
            -3
            Quote: V.ic
            In a nutshell, two mistakes

            Everything in life happens. yes
            Moreover, I have not errors, but typos.
            And here you have at least 3 Malicious errors in the comments. I will show you.
            "Just like in a rock opera" - together with "how" is written SAME (apart)
            "submit a document confirming the legitimacy" - you can imagine a person. A document confirming anything can only be provide.
            "The CPSU (b) supported Stalin" - it's funny, well, just a Freudian slip of the tongue! But you need to write correctly held.
            And now the question is, are you not ashamed after all of this ?!
            Quote: V.ic
            it is necessary to distinguish between the Bronstein / Apfelbaum and their opponent Dzhugashvili.

            They were opponents only in the struggle for power.
            Google what party Dzhugashvili was in before the revolution and what he did.
  5. Lieutenant Teterin
    Lieutenant Teterin 16 July 2016 11: 11
    +5
    Good article, but two other factors are missing. First, White did not use all the available forces, since the so-called "greens" attempted to break through to the rear of White in the South. Second - the whites, unfortunately, too late understood the nature of the Civil War - there was no place for knightly behavior in this war, and for victory it was necessary to use everything - lies, bribery, intimidation, violent mobilizations. The Bolsheviks realized this much earlier, but among the whites, for example, only Wrangel refused the Volunteer character of the army. And third, as some researchers say, Denikin's Moscow directive was a strategic mistake. More correct was Wrangel's rejected proposal for an offensive towards Kolchak's army, to join up with 500 thousand troops of the Eastern Front, which would help level the number of Reds in the subsequent advance to Central Russia.
    1. tatra
      tatra 16 July 2016 11: 16
      +3
      You, the enemies of the Communists, have so longed to take Russia / USSR from the Communists and their supporters in the Civil and Great Patriotic War, you meanness, lies, hypocrisy, slander, nevertheless robbed them of the USSR since 1991.
      But none of you can explain why. Unlike the Bolshevik Communists, you never intended to do anything good for the country and people.
      1. Lieutenant Teterin
        Lieutenant Teterin 16 July 2016 11: 39
        +6
        Dear, would you be so kind, tell me, what enemies of the communists in 1991 you mention so persistently? If we are talking about people who started perestroika and formalized the collapse of the USSR, then I dare to remind you that Gorbachev, Shevardnadze, Yakovlev, Yeltsin, Shushkevich, Kravchuk - all these people were in the CPSU. They were Octobrists, pioneers and Komsomol members. They taught the history of the CPSU and scientific communism. Grew up surrounded by communists and worked among communists. So how did they manage to "take away" the USSR from these communists?
        1. tatra
          tatra 16 July 2016 11: 46
          +1
          Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
          orbachev, Shevarnadze, Yakovlev, Yeltsin, Shushkevich, Kravchuk - all these people were members of the CPSU

          Yes, this is the mentality of the enemies of the Communists, they always lie and are hypocritical for the sake of profit, pretend to be who they are not, they commit crimes of crime together, and then betray each other.
          Lenin, almost 100 years after his death, has many supporters, and the enemies of the Communists on the territory of the USSR instantly betrayed their "Liberators" and benefactors Gorbachev and Yeltsin when they no longer needed them, threw them like unnecessary garbage to us, the supporters of the real communists who never betrayed their party, the USSR, the Soviet people.
          1. Lieutenant Teterin
            Lieutenant Teterin 16 July 2016 11: 58
            +6
            You have not answered the question posed. How did it happen that people who grew up in a state that promoted communist ideas, taught them in schools and universities, became these very "enemies." In the USSR, all sources of information and ideas were controlled by the state and the CPSU. How could "enemies of the communists" grow up in this environment?
            1. Mother CheeseEarth
              Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 12: 54
              -2
              Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
              You have not answered the question.

              And he will not answer, do not pay attention to him, this is some very fat and not funny troll, in every comment he writes "enemies of the communists", writes and laughs, probably like a horse.
              1. V.ic
                V.ic 16 July 2016 14: 15
                +1
                Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                this is some very fat and not funny troll, in every comment he writes "enemies of the communists", writes and laughs, probably like a horse.

                Dear, your comments are also not marked with high prizes (for some reason?).
                1. Mother CheeseEarth
                  Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 16: 05
                  -1
                  Quote: V.ic
                  Dear, your comments are also not marked with high prizes.

                  see. (specially with an error, so fashionable now)
                  And I don't come here for "prizes" and paper shoulder straps.
            2. V.ic
              V.ic 16 July 2016 14: 13
              +4
              Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
              How did it happen that people who grew up in a state that promoted communist ideas, taught them in schools and universities, became these very "enemies."

              Just like in the rock opera "Jesus Christ-Superstar" ... "Before the cock crows, you will renounce me three times" ... "Ay, do'nt know him!" The godfather of perestroika Yakovlev and a certain KGB officer Kalugin are mattress agents. Humpbacked-bald-Marked and Baruch Elson = two spiders in a bank, both on the hook of the CIA. As they say: do not bother the fools - they will do everything themselves! Think of a children's film and a song from it:
              "A fool doesn’t need a knife,
              I'll show you a brass penny
              And do whatever you want with him. "
              Since 1953, negative selection has been going on in the CPSU, which led to a negative result in 1991.
            3. Alex
              Alex 16 July 2016 15: 52
              +4
              Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
              How did it happen that people who grew up in a state that promoted communist ideas, taught them in schools and universities, became these very "enemies."

              If you have not heard anything about double morality, then it will be difficult to explain to you.
        2. Alex
          Alex 16 July 2016 15: 50
          +3
          Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
          I dare to recall that Gorbachev, Shevarnadze, Yakovlev, Yeltsin, Shushkevich, Kravchuk - all these people were members of the CPSU.

          That's it - consisted. There is, you know, a difference - being a communist or a party member ...
    2. V.ic
      V.ic 16 July 2016 13: 58
      -1
      Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
      for example, only the Wrangel refused the volunteer character of the army.

      Plagiarist. Stole from Slashchev Jacob Alexandrovich.
  6. EvilLion
    EvilLion 16 July 2016 11: 59
    +2
    2 July 1919 years in Tsaritsyn, just liberated from the reds by the Caucasian army, Baron Peter Wrangel


    It was also necessary to write how the Germans in the 41th liberated Kiev, Minsk, etc., in terms of meaning, it would be approximately the same. The minus is already for this, you can not read further.
    1. Mother CheeseEarth
      Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 13: 02
      -2
      Quote: EvilLion
      It was also necessary to write how the Germans liberated Kiev, Minsk in the 41st

      Well, you can write anything on the fence, even obscenities.
      And the whites were representatives of the legitimate government, and no one called the Bolsheviks to Tsaritsyn.
      Because the Bolsheviks missed the free elections in the country with a bang, even with "millions" of German money behind them.
      1. V.ic
        V.ic 16 July 2016 14: 22
        -1
        Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
        And whites were representatives of legitimate authority,

        It would be advisable for you to submit a document confirming the legitimacy of whites! And then all the words, words, blah blah, blah blah ...
        1. Mother CheeseEarth
          Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 16: 21
          0
          Quote: V.ic
          It would be advisable for you to submit a document confirming the legitimacy of whites!

          I see the carnival of "simple questions" today.
          Of course, I appreciate your curiosity, but I would prefer that you google yourself:
          1. What was the Provisional Government and who committed its overthrow.
          2. What is the All-Russian Constituent Assembly and who dispersed it.
          3. What is the relationship between these events and the outbreak of the Civil War.
          4. At the same time, google when and how the "Bolshevik junta" was recognized abroad
          (USA, if anything, recognized only in 1933)
          1. V.ic
            V.ic 16 July 2016 20: 54
            +2
            Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
            I look ... I, of course, ..: 1. What is ... 2. What is ... 3. Which ... 4. At the same time ...

            So do I.
            Google, this is such a garbage bin on which everything is lying, for every taste.
            1. Do you consider it legitimate? Were the elections held? New authorities formed on the basis of ELECTIONS?
            2. A completely bourgeois organ and a split in the ranks of the Social Revolutionaries, some of which joined the Bolsheviks, confirms this. Formally, then anarchists.
            3. So who is COMUCH zabatsat there?
            4. The first Kemalist Turks in 1921, then Germany in 1922.
            Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
            (USA, if anything, recognized only in 1933)

            Well, so M.N.Zadornov says about them: stupid.
            1. Mother CheeseEarth
              Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 22: 20
              0
              Quote: V.ic
              Do you consider it legitimate?

              I believe? His entire civilized world then thought so, and now every normal historian. But the Bolsheviks NO.
              Quote: V.ic
              Completely bourgeois organ

              If you are over 90 years old, you say so, I will not torment you.
              Quote: V.ic
              So who is there that KOMUCH zabatsat?

              When and where was COMUCH, and when and who did the All-Russian Constituent Assembly disperse, and previously overthrew the Provisional Government?
              Quote: V.ic
              The first Kemalist Turks

              Terrorists who are not in power? Cool! You forgot about Afghanistan (1923) and Hijaz (1924).
              By the way, maybe remember, when did the USSR even announce its existence ?!
              Quote: V.ic
              so M.N.Zadornov speaks about them

              Well, Zadornov’s flat humor is probably just your level, but meanwhile the USA is a world hegemon, but the USSR is not, the USSR NO!
              1. V.ic
                V.ic 17 July 2016 08: 01
                +2
                Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                I believe? His entire civilized world then thought so, and now every normal historian. But there are NO Bolsheviks.

                So beloved and adored by you so-called. "civilized world"actually always wanted to see Russia in a coffin, and in the remaining territories from her put their clerks! Here try / strain the gyrus / and try to refute this opinion.
                Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                If you are over 90 years old, you say so, I will not torment you.

                Do not worry, Marquise, while only 60.
                Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                When and where was the lump,

                It was the very body that consolidated the dissatisfied with the Bolsheviks. By the way, was your "mashiach" Trotsky near Sviyazhsk shell-shocked by a shell explosion? Did he shoot by himself or someone?
                Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                when and who dispersed the All-Russian Constituent Assembly,

                Are you illiterate? Ask then to read my answer to you earlier. I can add the "iron" phrase "the guard is tired".
                Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                dispersed, and previously overthrown the Provisional Government?

                You still did not know IT? Only for you (for some it is a terrible military-political secret) the October revolution was organized by some people who joined the Bolsheviks who arrived from the USA, led by Leiba Bronstein, but the trigger was pulled by Ulyanov-Lenin, who felt the moment necessary for success. I will continue ...
                1. V.ic
                  V.ic 17 July 2016 08: 07
                  +2
                  I continue:
                  Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                  Cool! You forgot about Afghanistan (1923) and Hijaz (1924).

                  One feels recently some history textbook leafed through ... With the funding of the publication by Soros, of course?
                  Read the link, in case this is a "zapadlo" for you, then I quote from there:
                  http://shporiforall.ru/shpory/history20vek/vneshnyaya-politika-sovetskogo-gosuda
                  rstva-1921-nachalo-30-x-godov.html
                  "In 1924 Great Britain officially recognized the USSR.
                  1924-1925 entered the history of international relations as the years of diplomatic recognition of the USSR. During this period, diplomatic relations were established with Great Britain, Italy, Austria, Norway, Sweden, China, Denmark, Mexico, France, Japan. "
                  Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                  By the way, maybe remember, when did the USSR even announce its existence ?!

                  Exactly 2 months and 15 days later, as the last Japanese soldier left Primorye and exactly 2 months and 5 days later, as the red troops led by I.P. Uborevich and the red partisans occupied Vladivostok
                  Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                  Well, Zadornov’s flat humor is probably just your level,

                  And if M.N.Zadoronov speaks the truth!
                  Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                  USA world hegemon,

                  Putin recently voiced this, but you do not agree with the president of the Russian Federation?
                  Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                  and the USSR is not, the USSR is generally NO longer!

                  Do you have a tantrum from this? Sadly ... But nevertheless, the Soviet Union was also the current Russian Federation obliged by its fact of its existence precisely to what the USSR was!
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 16 July 2016 15: 42
        +3
        Well, actually the result of the civil war perfectly shows how the people voted. With what fright the whites (by the way, the tsar, by the way, did not force the Bolsheviks to abdicate) became a legitimate authority to ask no need.

        There was such a film for schoolchildren, however, "New Adventures of the Elusive", but the people still remembered what the whites and their political ideas were, and this was perfectly shown in the episode with the fight in the restaurant. Such a "legitimate" power that she herself does not know what she is fighting for.
        1. Mother CheeseEarth
          Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 17: 07
          -2
          Quote: EvilLion
          the result of the civil war perfectly shows how the people voted.

          Enchanting!
          Voting is accounting every voice, in count.
          The Bolsheviks began their civilian life with 500 thousand, and they also finished it.
          Of course, between these dates in the Red Army there were more people, but nonetheless.
          Fewer people voted for the Bolsheviks with the "gun" than for their "opponents", and in total, less than 5% of the population of the entire RI passed through the Red Army.
          In the modern Russian Federation, with such a number of "voted", you can't even get into the Duma!
          1. V.ic
            V.ic 16 July 2016 20: 29
            +2
            Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
            The Bolsheviks started the citizen with 500 тыс. и they finished it.

            Well, why lie to something? "since 1921 A gradual reduction in the country's Armed Forces began. AT for three to four years the total strength of the armed forces was brought up to xnumx thousand... ".
            http://sssr-my.ru/army/reformy-krasnoj-armii-1920-30x-godov.html
            1. Mother CheeseEarth
              Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 22: 56
              -2
              Quote: V.ic
              //sssr-my.ru/army/reformy-krasnoj-armii-1920-30x-godov.html

              He looked.
              (forced to admit, rather squeamish)
              Another Bolshevik agitation, which has little in common with the real state of affairs.
              It’s enough to note that in your campaign not a word about the Labor Armies.
              Meanwhile, individual units of the Red Army, not participating in hostilities, were involved "in performing economic tasks" starting in 1918 ..
              And already in 1920, entire labor armies were formed, right up to 1921, which were part of the Red Army.
              So, their number was the data in your agitation of 5-5.5 million "shovel and shovel warriors", who gave only at least 20% of the food products produced in the country at that time.
              Well, the actual number of fighters in the Red Army, armed with a gun, not a mop, I approximately told you.
              1. V.ic
                V.ic 17 July 2016 08: 05
                +1
                Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
                Well, the actual number of fighters in the Red Army, armed with a gun, not a mop, I approximately told you.

                You lied by date. The number of the Red Army was omitted only by 1925, and not after the end of the civil war in the SSR! Slippery you burbot!
  7. timyr
    timyr 16 July 2016 13: 17
    +3
    Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
    Quote: EvilLion
    It was also necessary to write how the Germans liberated Kiev, Minsk in the 41st

    Well, you can write anything on the fence, even obscenities.
    And the whites were representatives of the legitimate government, and no one called the Bolsheviks to Tsaritsyn.
    Because the Bolsheviks missed the free elections in the country with a bang, even with "millions" of German money behind them.

    Documents about German money are possible. And then everyone is screaming about German money, but they are nowhere to be found. Well, the Bolsheviks have no documents, the wild ones were not able to write. Well, the Germans, because after the defeat the allies across Germany traveled, and not a single document was presented. But such a trump card would have been, but there is no nichrome. And who told you that whites are legitimate. Maybe the Reds were just representatives of the legitimate government, against which other socialists rebelled.
    1. Mother CheeseEarth
      Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 16: 31
      0
      Quote: timyr
      And then everyone is screaming about German money, but they are nowhere to be found.

      Don’t worry, they have already spent them a long time ago, you won’t get it.
      And there was money. Google about 21 volumes of investigative materials, on the basis of which a criminal case was opened against the Bolsheviks and Ulyanov personally, in whose name the prosecutor’s office issued an arrest.
      And also, you can read that the Bolsheviks were the only organization in the country opposing the continuation of the war, while the cost of circulation of Bolshevik newspapers and leaflets exceeded the "membership fees" in "fig knows how many times."
      Quote: timyr
      And such a trump card would be

      What a trump card ?! What are you talking about ?!
      The Bolsheviks overthrew the legitimate government, drowned Russia waist-deep in blood, the United States recognized them only in 1933, and did not recognize the Soviet ruble abroad anywhere, while 100500 books about the horrors of Bolshevism went abroad.
      And the Bolsheviks did not even scratch themselves! And you are the "trump card"! Yes, they wanted to sneeze on "trump cards", they had a simple policy, who had "trump cards", but they had mass shootings of dissenters and all the "trump cards" in the water!
  8. timyr
    timyr 16 July 2016 13: 21
    +3
    Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
    Quote: EvilLion
    It was also necessary to write how the Germans liberated Kiev, Minsk in the 41st

    Well, you can write anything on the fence, even obscenities.
    And the whites were representatives of the legitimate government, and no one called the Bolsheviks to Tsaritsyn.
    Because the Bolsheviks missed the free elections in the country with a bang, even with "millions" of German money behind them.

    Documents about German money are possible. And then everyone is screaming about German money, but they are nowhere to be found. Well, the Bolsheviks have no documents, the wild ones were not able to write. Well, the Germans, because after the defeat the allies across Germany traveled, and not a single document was presented. But such a trump card would have been, but there is no nichrome. And who told you that whites are legitimate. Maybe the Reds were just representatives of the legitimate government, against which other socialists rebelled.
    Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
    You have not answered the question posed. How did it happen that people who grew up in a state that promoted communist ideas, taught them in schools and universities, became these very "enemies." In the USSR, all sources of information and ideas were controlled by the state and the CPSU. How could "enemies of the communists" grow up in this environment?

    As for Kravchuk, it is known for certain that he was a young Bandera man. And as for Yakovlev and Gorbi, they know that they had a circle of intellectuals there. Like Stalin led Russia in the wrong direction, it is necessary to carry out reforms, to clear socialism. Well, they were moved forward to plunder the country under the guise.
  9. timyr
    timyr 16 July 2016 13: 36
    +5
    Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
    Quote: timyr
    In what it turns out Estonians and Latvians were foreigners. And I thought that the Baltic states were part of the Russian Empire, and Aleksander gave it independence.

    Well, in general, the Bolsheviks gave them independence, during the events described, these were already independent states, and the "foreigners" mentioned in the article took part in battles against representatives of the legitimate government, who were defending, among other things, the original integrity of the Russian Empire.
    Therefore, these "Latvians" cannot be called nothing other than mercenaries from states hostile to the Russian people who organized ethnic cleansing of the Russian people on the territory of Russia.

    Another ignoramus when Latvian arrows were formed in 18 or 19. It does not happen in the year 15, when the Germans broke through the front and approached Riga, Latvian battalions were formed that held the front. And what kind of bloody Bolshevik signed a decree on the creation of Latvian battalions, General Alekseev cannot be. Latvian arrows were especially distinguished during the Christmas battles of 16 years. At the same time, having suffered the most severe losses, out of 26 tons of losses of the Russian Army, 9 tons were Latvians. The shooters were thrown on machine guns, without artillery support and help, there was a scandal, General Alekseev demanded an investigation, but the case died out due to the February revolution. And how are units of the Russian Imperial Army, consisting of citizens of Russia, are mercenaries.
    1. Mother CheeseEarth
      Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 16: 38
      -2
      Quote: timyr
      when the Latvian arrows were formed in the 18th or 19th year. Does not turn out in the year 15

      Enchanting logic!
      Then, according to your logic, the "cold war" was probably a civil one, because Alaska and California are "Russian states" and many Americans are "citizens of the Republic of Ingushetia", but "Sikorsky" is generally a Soviet helicopter! belay
      In general, google what is "time", "citizenship" and "The objective side of the crime", in particular "the way, place, time, decor, means and instruments of committing a crime ".
      But if on a simple basis, the husband cannot rape his wife, but the ex-husband is quite.
  10. Verdun
    Verdun 16 July 2016 14: 30
    +4
    "God has not blessed the success of the troops that I lead."
    Maybe you should have thought more about strategy and tactics and less about blessing? On the whole, when one reads about the battles of that time, according to the recollections of some "memoirists", a false impression is created about a high concentration of troops and intense hostilities. Meanwhile, the density of troops rarely reached 500 people per kilometer, and the intensity of hostilities was constrained by the lack of ammunition. It was because of the lack of ammunition that the so-called "psychic attacks" were used. It was in conditions of low intensity of fire that saber horse attacks became possible. At the same time, the Bolsheviks managed to largely solve the problem of lack of ammunition by organizing their production at factories. But the White Guards, who hoped more for the help of the Entente, did not wait for the required number of gifts. As for the effectiveness of the command, it was approximately the same on both sides. After all, people who graduated from the same military academies fought among themselves. Hence the result - the side that had material and numerical superiority won.
  11. timyr
    timyr 16 July 2016 14: 58
    +4
    Quote: Aleksander
    Quote: timyr
    In what it turns out Estonians and Latvians were foreigners. And I thought that the Baltic states were part of the Russian Empire,


    It was Lenin's "government" that gave them and recognized their independence back in 1918. And, accordingly, the citizens of these independent (from the point of view of Lenin) states in 1919 were for leninds by foreign mercenariesworking for money. How can you not know basic things? request belay Mercenaries (including the Chinese) guard the gold reserve, mercenaries guard the Kremlin, the Leninists, Bronstein-ah, what "people's" leaders who do not trust this very people. yes
    Quote: timyr
    And I thought

    Do not strain, this is clearly not yours. hi

    Well, explain the baker as citizens of the Russian Empire, and then the republics that did not accept Latvian citizenship are mercenaries. According to your logic, an officer serving in the Soviet Army who, after the collapse, transferred to the Russian Army is a mercenary if he is not Russian. You really have nothing to think about.
    1. Aleksander
      Aleksander 16 July 2016 22: 49
      -2
      Quote: timyr
      Well, explain the baker as citizens of the Russian Empire, and then the republics that did not accept Latvian citizenship are mercenaries. According to your logic, an officer serving in the Soviet Army who, after the collapse, transferred to the Russian Army is a mercenary if he is not Russian. You really have nothing to think about.

      Still made an attempt to "think" lol . And they mutilated themselves, finally.

      It was never CITIZENS RI, Были Nationals of RI. Again, your nose fell between ... a bun, as with the number of naval officers and others.

      Tired of my ignorance.
      Really it is impossible to READ before writing the BAD and get on в once again in .. buns?

      Further: Lenind recognized the independence of the Soviet Republic of Latvia in 1918, THEN in January 1919 in LATVIA itself was formed ARMY OF INDEPENDENT SOVIET REPUBLIC OF LATVIA. It’s clear which republicLATVIA! -I repeat for the Bulk's nose. The "army" was defeated by Latvians, Estonians, etc., it fled from Latvia to Russia and that's where this army is BEAST MERCURES state of Soviet Latvia and destroyed tens of thousands of peasants in hundreds of uprisings.

      Then they returned to WHITE Latvia belay served faithfully bourgeoisie, in 1941-in the Wehrmacht and the SS.

      Formed by yourself, nosomvza. Bulk. Tired of it.
      1. Bloodsucker
        Bloodsucker 27 September 2016 22: 31
        0
        Hrustobulochnik Alexander, from weakness in a lie to prove the foolishness he wrote, began to invent new words? Well, how is it familiar with the nose between the rolls?
        You dear, in your lies so tired of everyone ...
        By the way, DONOS write, who taught you?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  12. timyr
    timyr 16 July 2016 17: 10
    +2
    Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
    Quote: timyr
    when the Latvian arrows were formed in the 18th or 19th year. Does not turn out in the year 15

    Enchanting logic!
    Then, according to your logic, the "cold war" was probably a civil one, because Alaska and California are "Russian states" and many Americans are "citizens of the Republic of Ingushetia", but "Sikorsky" is generally a Soviet helicopter! belay
    In general, google what is "time", "citizenship" and "The objective side of the crime", in particular "the way, place, time, decor, means and instruments of committing a crime ".
    But if on a simple basis, the husband cannot rape his wife, but the ex-husband is quite.

    It follows your logic that Alaska and California belonged to the Russian Empire in 1917. I will ask you a question whether the Latvian arrows for February 17 were a division of the Russian Imperial Army. Are the soldiers who served as citizens of the Russian Empire. After the collapse of Russia, did the Latvian arrows accept the citizenship of Latvia or another state. And to whom the Latvian arrows took the oath, you can explain. Yes, and whose citizenship Sikorsky adopted or he left himself Russian.
    1. Mother CheeseEarth
      Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 19: 52
      -2
      Quote: timyr
      I will ask you a question

      And do not need unnecessary questions.
      1. In strict accordance with the rule of law, almost all members of the Red Army were mercenaries.
      2. Latvia from the point of view of the Bolsheviks was at the time of the events described an independent state.
      Accordingly, all (at the time the Bolsheviks recognized the independence of Latvia) lived and registered in Latvia, including all those who was temporarily on the territory of the RSFSR, they automatically became citizens of Latvia, and not the RSFSR.
      And Latvian shooters as participants national and territorial Latvian formation this also concerned.
      This is also the rule of law. And in accordance with them, the Bolsheviks were obliged to disband the "Latvian national formations" located on the territory of the RSFSR after the recognition of Latvia's independence.
      3. Considering paragraphs 1 and 2, the Latvian riflemen conducting military operations with representatives of a legitimate government were foreign mercenaries in the territory of the RSFSR.
      And this is not a debatable issue, but a historically accepted fact!
      “After the conclusion of peace with the Bolsheviks, the Latvian government repeatedly protested against the non-compliance with the agreement on the disbandment of the Latvian division. Finally, on November 28, Frunze began to disband the Latvian regiments.
      Party Archive of the Central Committee of the CPL, f. 45, op. 3, d. 87, l. 148. "
      At the same time, practically EVERYTHING (except for individual leaders who made a career) returned to their homeland in Latvia !!!!
      (and later the bulk of the former "shooters" joined the ranks of the German army in WW2)
      At the beginning of 1921, trains with Latvian arrows started arriving in Latvia. Now on the wagons not red flags fluttered, but national Latvian ones; on the walls of the wagons posters were not pasted with the slogans: “Long live the proletarian revolution!”, “Death to the imperialists and the bourgeoisie”, etc., like a year ago, during the invasion of the Latvian rifles. regiments to the Baltic states - but “Long live free Latvia!”
      1. timyr
        timyr 16 July 2016 20: 06
        +3
        Congratulations, you have made the greatest historical discovery. It turns out that some mercenaries served in the Red Army. Share what you smoke. Well, you have bad Bulkhorsts with logic. And tell me, a certain Marshal Rokossovsky is also a mercenary and Shaposhnikov also comes out. It turns out, by your logic, that all the former officers of the Soviet Army serving in the Russian Army are mercenaries. Congratulations, I always suspected that the crunch of French rolls replaces the brains of crunchy crumbs, and I was convinced of this. And the question can be those whites who came with Hitler, that it was possible for them to come to us with the Germans, and before that with the invaders.
        1. Mother CheeseEarth
          Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 23: 12
          -1
          Quote: timyr
          It turns out that some mercenaries served in the Red Army.

          Quote: timyr
          a certain Marshal Rokossovsky is also a mercenary and Shaposhnikov also comes out.

          Of course. And this is not news, it has long been known to every normal historian.
          The same Zhukov "remembers" that in 1919 he was in a group of communist sympathizers in the amount of as many as FIVE people per squadron, and was preparing to join the party.
          At the same time, he himself writes that at that time he "had little idea" not only of what communism was, but also of what the party's policy was in general.
          But then the question is, why did he then fight with the Russian Army for about a year, even if he didn’t even know the programs of the Bolshevik party ?!
          Well, a little earlier he himself wrote that "The soldiers of the Red Army were fully supported by the state and, moreover, they first received 50 rubles a month, and then, from the middle of 1918, 150 rubles - single Red Army men, 250 rubles - family."
          Therefore, yes, almost all the former Tsarist sergeants (I'm talking about future Bolshevik generals) in whose biographies you see, "joined the party in 1918-1919", are the most mercenaries who went to fight against the legitimate army and government for money.
          Quote: timyr
          former officers of the Soviet Army serving in the Russian Army are mercenaries.

          Of course not!
          If only because the officers of the Russian army were initially subordinate to the popularly elected and legitimate president, and not the gang of revolutionaries that seized power, and did not conduct military operations with the Soviet army.
          1. Bloodsucker
            Bloodsucker 27 September 2016 22: 29
            +1
            All that you are anti-Soviet and Russophobia from liberalism, measure the loot.
            And all one thing comes out, awkward lies ... It's ridiculous to read such pearls.
  13. timyr
    timyr 16 July 2016 17: 30
    +4
    Quote: Beefeater
    Quote: timyr
    Quote: Aleksander
    The strike group under the command of former Major General Anton Martusevich. She consisted of Latvian and Estonian divisions. in mid-October, bloody battles broke out between the Kornilovites - on the one hand and Latvians with Estonians - with another


    Yeah, without foreign mercenaries- the beasts, the Bolsheviks, nowhere, they constituted the most reliable power of the Reds: they do not mind the killing of Russians, and even for the money.
    It is good that almost all the remaining received full payment: they were destroyed in the 30's as agents of foreign intelligence.

    In what it turns out Estonians and Latvians were foreigners. And I thought that the Baltic states were part of the Russian Empire, and Aleksander gave it independence. To school immediately, ignoramus, bakers all such or only Aleksander.

    At that time, the Balts were not part of the Russian state, therefore they were foreigners. Didn't you know that? From the 18th to the 39th. There were also Chinese. In Blucher's convoy in particular. Hungarians were. For the Reds, unlike the Czechs. They have done a lot of trouble. So, ignoramus.
    Then the "red Latvian riflemen" made their way to their homeland. Well, in 41st the crowd went to enroll in the Latvian SS legion. For you, a lover of the proletarian rye bread and an internazi, they are, of course, brothers and compatriots.

    Learn a little history of civil wars. In any country, France or England, take the side that enjoys the greatest support of the population. For you white course Hitler brother. As there one of yours spoke Mannerheim did not kill the Russians, but the Soviet. Yes, and please list the Latvian shooters recruited to the SS. I will repeat once again for the bifiter whether the Latvian arrows accepted the citizenship of Latvia. Or it’s more understandable if I ask whether the former officers of the Soviet Army are mercenaries once they have moved to serve in the Russian Army.
    1. Bloodsucker
      Bloodsucker 27 September 2016 22: 27
      +1
      Quote: timyr
      For you white course Hitler brother. As there one of yours spoke Mannerheim did not kill the Russians, but the Soviet.

      You write correctly.
      For Russophobes such as Alexander, this is exactly the case of the Hitlers, Krasnovs and other Vlasovs, these are his ideological accomplices, they killed so many Russians, because they supported the Reds.
  14. Mother CheeseEarth
    Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 20: 24
    -1
    timyr

    And yet, initially did not pay attention!
    when the Latvian arrows were formed in the 18th or 19th year. Does not turn out in the year 15

    This is also a lie!
    Latvian arrows, "formed in 1915" and the "red Latvian arrows" we are discussing are DIFFERENT PEOPLE!
    The overwhelming majority of the "red riflemen" from the Latin division (later the army) did not fight in WW1, but were "mobilized" already with the beginning of the civil war, including AFTER recognition of the independence of Latvia.
    At the same time, a considerable part (20-25 percent) of Latvians did not belong to any "Latvian rifle division", but were in all sorts of separate detachments, such as the "Volmar Volunteer Battalion", formed already in February 1919.
    1. Aleksander
      Aleksander 16 July 2016 23: 10
      -2
      Quote: Mother CheeseEarth
      Latvian riflemen, "formed in 1915" and the "red Latvian riflemen" we are discussing are DIFFERENT PEOPLE! The overwhelming majority of "red riflemen" from the Latin division (then the army) did not fight in WW1, but were "mobilized" already with the beginning of the civil war, and including AFTER the recognition of the independence of Latvia.


      Leave, a person is TOTALLY illiterate and apart from aplomb has nothing for his soul.
      I’ll supplement, if you may: in January 1919 (after recognition of the Republic of Latvia in 1918) in [b] LATVIA itself, an ARMY of the INDEPENDENT SOVIET REPUBLIC OF LATVIA was formed, and it was this army of BEAST-MERCENARIES of the state of Soviet Latvia (who fled from Latvia) and destroyed tens of thousands of crosses hundreds of rebellions, fighting for the Reds.
      1. Bloodsucker
        Bloodsucker 27 September 2016 22: 24
        +1
        Another nonsense of the hater.
        Do you want to report for Yeltsin?
        For the Entente?
        For Hitler?
        And ... you do not want, they are yours, they fiercely killed the RUSSIANS, because they supported the RED.
        And it annoys you so much, a crunch lover of French rolls ...
  15. antivirus
    antivirus 16 July 2016 23: 41
    0
    always knew this
    In the minds of the bulk of the Cossacks, the Motherland rarely went beyond the pages of the villages. By the autumn of 1919 they were freed from the Bolsheviks. Therefore, a significant part of the rank and file Cossacks did not see any reason to continue the war.
    In the USSR this story was known, but to all of you - ???
  16. gendir.grifon
    gendir.grifon 27 September 2016 21: 36
    +2
    Yes, "Mr." Denikin was right about God, who did not bless the success of his troops. The people understood well what the counts, princes and other whites wanted, who wanted the return of their familiar world of "Schubert's waltzes and the crunch of a French roll," and therefore supported the Bolsheviks. And you shouldn't believe any pseudo-researchers who, from the point of view of the present day and not free of charge, denounce the "Soviet totalitarian regime". All this is a lie. If it were not for the management team of I.V. Stalin, then Russia in general would not exist in any form.
  17. den-protector
    den-protector 26 December 2016 23: 34
    +1
    In addition to God, the people did not bless the success of the bourgeois troops.
  18. Molot1979
    Molot1979 29 June 2017 11: 06
    0
    And why is such regret heard in the text? I would not like all Hitler of the Constituent Assembly to beat off Hitler in 1941, who could not even take out the night pot.
    Also here, some blame the use of the Latvian and Estonian units in red. But, firstly, the whites themselves are no better here, and the fall is even worse: the Reds used at least natives of the empire, and the Czechs, Poles, Germans, Anglo-French, Americans and even Greeks with Serbs helped White. Excluding the Greeks and Serbs - all the other great "friends" of Russia, who, of course, always baked only about its good ... So the question is, who is Judas, IMHO, is not even worth it. And secondly, Latvia and Estonia at that time were considered by its Bolsheviks as part of the country, so what kind of foreign mercenaries are they? Later, according to the results of the GV, it turned out that the Balts left for freestyle swimming. And who created exactly the Estonian and Latvian units? And they inherited the Bolsheviks from the previous regime. So they should be considered as part of the imperial army that supported the Bolsheviks. Bolsheviks, not their homegrown nationalists at all.
    Finally, who is to blame for the white that they had a bad interaction? Who is the evil Pinocchio that people did not support them? And what did not support is clearly visible to any unbiased person. If there was support, there would be troops. Therefore, there were not enough reserves. Cossacks did not intend to fight for a single and indivisible. There, on the Don, they proclaimed their own state, in which fully natural citizens were exclusively natural Cossacks. And even kinship with the Russian people was denied. But something "Russian patriot" Denikin was in no hurry to crush the Don separatists.