On the "direct" and "indirect" myths

Oleg Kozinkin

November 25, 2012

 After the death of Stalin (or rather even during his lifetime), several hundred "direct" and "indirect" myths appeared that vilified Stalin. Direct myths make it impudently, and indirect - stealthily. Thus myths are born day and night. At the same time, some "historians" compose them, others expose them, others refute both. There is a stormy "historical and scientific" life. And again, everyone is making money on this. Taking the history of the pre-war period, historians enter a "slippery" road. This theme is a battlefield for our brains.

 There is an information war (eternal, and moreover) and it all depends on who will end up with such a "historian", unless of course he has already decided on this in advance. On the one hand, the remains of "historians" from the CPSU, whose version of those events is still official. On the other, the reznu-svanidze-sokolovy-corned beef, famously "exposing" this story and imposing their "version" through the media and TV. With the third, "neo-Stalinists" are martyros, proving that both the first and especially the second "historians" are simply clowns and patients of the Serbsky clinic.

 Of course, all these pykhalovs, flies and the like Isaevs, naturally, "earn money with their books in defense of Stalin" and controversy with rezunami. And they both really "earn their living", receiving money from the sale of their books, "earn" by writing books, refuting "opponents". Honor fees, incidentally, are not so big, because the book must be sold. But they have one "small difference", from each other, and especially the second "historians" are simply clowns and patients of the Serbsky clinic.

Pyhalov and the other Martiros do not make a living with a caviar with a caviar for watering the mud of our history, exposing the "atrocities of Stalinism". Do not earn a living from lawyers from Hitler, proving that Stalin himself wanted to attack Germany (and the whole of Europe to the heap). But Rezun and his team have their dubious fame on this and earn. And Rezunov and the like, all the evidence and revelations are built as a result on a single axiom: Stalin is the Most Chief Villain of All Times and Peoples !!! So it simply could not help but think about attacking enlightened Europe in the person of Hitler's poor.

 There is nothing wrong with getting a fee for your books. But maybe Rezuny does not earn money? Are they ideological? Then it turns out even more terrible. The same Svanidze, finally called at least V.V. Pozner more on January 26, 2008. in his "Times", "historian", in his "ideology" comes simply to ridiculous pathology. Participating in a conversation about corruption in Russia, he managed to be noted with another shit, "but the peasants did not have passports under Stalin!" Who is talking about, and lousy about the bath. He already flashes to TV less and less, but as a true and convinced "revolutionary" he will never betray his "Idea". I suspect that many do not like the specific "historian" Svanidze. But the choice for all "historians" is not great. Either they are with these, or with those. However, if a friend can create his own, separate, fourth group of historians on this topic, then ... But, in fact, all these "historians-haters" of Stalin are divided, for all their varied palette, into only two groups. Some "official". And other heirs and descendants of "victims of political repressions", "grandchildren of repressed Blyukher and Tukhachevsky". But they both hate "neo-Stalinists" equally. And anyone who climbs in these "historical wars", in the end still faces a choice, whose side will be taken not even by himself, but by his "ingenious, all-explaining Hypothesis." In war, as in war. who climbs in these "historical wars", eventually still faces a choice, whose side will be occupied not even by himself, but by his "ingenious, all-explaining Hypothesis." In war, as in war.

A new generation of young researchers grows up, naively thinking that they can stay above the fight, remain "objective. They try to write about Stalin's time and activities, sort of as "distant", without emotions, but also without evaluating himself as a person. They try to understand the logic of Stalin's behavior, the logic of his decision-making, the abstract "logic of understanding politics" in general. Logic and understanding of politics, this is of course great. But documents and their analysis are also needed. Sometimes the seeming illogicality of the processes and actions of politicians becomes clear after studying additional "documents". For example, Hitler's conclusion of the "Pact Treaty" with Stalin in 1939, for Hitler himself, seems to be absolutely unprofitable-the loss of "allies" in the Baltic, with the loss of a chic bridgehead for an attack on the USSR through these allies and other minuses. But in the end, he knew what he could gain in the future by giving Stalin vast territories. Hitler was persistently pushed to Poland, with a subsequent exit to the Baltic states. The crown of the dreams of Hitler's sponsors was the hope that Stalin would either take unilateral commitments to "protect the Polish brothers" (the "relatives" sent him) and get involved in the war with Hitler, defending the interests of the USSR, or get involved in the war himself somehow by themselves, not wanting to allow Hitler to penetrate the Baltic states. After all, Hitler, attacking Poland, which under him trite put England, creating at the same time Hitler "alibi" and "excuse" for the attack, and promising the Poles any conceivable and unthinkable help, if she continues to stupidly throw herself at Germany, fell into the joyful embrace of the fascist Baltic states, which in fact were ruled by the German "barons" since the beginning. Thus, Hitler went to the distance of a direct shot across Leningrad, which "threatened the national interests of the USSR" (!). And Stalin simply "had to take action" and eventually get involved in the War with Hitler. However, the Great War in 1939, too, did not smile at all to Hitler himself. He had only a couple of months left for a war with Poland. He did not only want to be a vulgar fool and a six of the West, but also tried to uphold the interests of his "Reich". And this "Treaty of non-aggression", very necessary to Stalin, was also very necessary to Hitler. At least, Hitler himself, hoped in the future to recoup profits. Another thing is that his plans, in the end, did not quite come true. Or rather, did not come true.

 Or for example absolutely "not logical" in many ways the story of the German battleship "Tirpitsa" launching on the "rout" of the allied convoy PQ-17 in the spring of 1942. I have never "studied" this story in detail, I will not lie. But I recently read, somewhere, that the Tirpitz, who was so scared in the English admiralty, was not going to the meeting, but after the convoy. That is, he could not catch up with him? Then why did you ever leave the base? That Western historians, that ours immediately find explanations in the "inexplicable" acts of different officials in the leadership of the English Navy and the German command. The movie "PQ-17" shows how long and tiresome Hitler was thinking-to send a battleship against the convoy, or not. As a result, sends, but in such a way that his "campaign" becomes simply meaningless (if indeed does not send across, but after?). And then Lunin snapped his torpedoes. This Lunin torpedo salvo on "Tirpitsu" German and English historians gave a wonderful opportunity to "dissemble", they say, if not for this attack (it is modestly called some mythical "malfunction" of the battleship, because of which he returned back to base), then "Tirpitz" would have unequivocally caught up with the convoy and surely would have sunk it. So the decision of the British to drop the convoy without cover was absolutely "justified." Who is to blame for the fact that some Russian submariner with his "unsuccessful shooting" forced the Tirpitz to return to the base? Do not happen, and the convoy would be destroyed along with the cover ships. And so only transport ships suffered, to which the British and business in general, there is no. But much becomes "clearer" if we admit that Hitler simply provided the British with "service." "Tirpitz" sent, but so that that convoy does not catch up. In this case, Churchill had a completely "convincing reason" to throw the convoy. The Germans still sank most of the ships (especially the British there was not the majority?) From the air and with the help of submarines, and the British had an occasion to freeze supplies to the USSR - maybe those Russians would die sooner, or at least not start "winning" already in the 42-m. As a result, Hitler also won, and the British "kept their promise" in front of him, and Churchill's plans to piss Russia off were realized. And the next, PQ-18, went to Russia only in the winter. That is, all the external "illogicality" of the actions of Hitler, who pulled with the dispatch of the battleship, disappears if one understands the "logic" of his relations with England. But, by the way, Hitler always declared that Germany and England should rule the world (the USA let them sit in their hemisphere). But only in England, and even more so in the United States, have always had their own plans, both for Hitler and for the whole world. In general, the history of Britain's dark "relationship" with its protégé Hitler will remain closed for many centuries to come. How these contacts were carried out, what could the British promise to Hitler at the beginning of the war, creating the appearance of aid to Stalin, especially in the first year of the War, will certainly never become the property of history. The situation with the "convoy" simply continues the general nasty (for us) policy of England. Nothing personal, only selfish interests. Otherwise, England would have long ago disappeared from the world stage. So, any young "independent" researcher, starting to write about this time, will have to take some side in this ideological war. (Of course it's possible to famously promote Azef as a vulgar agent of the British special services,

The Stalin era and in general the time of the 1920s, 30s, 40s of the 20th century, on the one hand, seemed to be quite recent for us, born in the late 20th century and living today, in the 21st century. But in fact, as far away from us as historically, like the time of Peter, Alexander I, or Alexander III. It is absolutely impossible and just illiterate to approach those times with the standards of modern man and modern life. When the "denunciators of Stalinism" begin to denounce the "bloody Stalinist regime" and quote "terrible facts" confirming their "revelations", they are not able to understand (or do not want, what is worse) that these "facts" are not enough just nonsense, written off from such "historians" as Solzhenitsyn, who wrote his masterpiece "The Archipelago ..." under the supervision of specialists of "oral history" from the United States. But these "facts" perceived today with righteous anger and horror, then were not something out of the ordinary phenomenon, event, or rule. These "facts" were an ordinary norm, which surprised no one, were completely justified in those specific time frames of pre- -war and military life. For people of that era and that country it was "normal" to rush to the embrasure, or with grenades under the tank. It was "normal" to go to ramming during an air battle, when cartridges ran out, or the arms refused. Only on the first day of the war 20 air rams were committed. Of these, only 12 pilots were fighter pilots, but the rest were pilots-bombers and stormtroopers. In total, over 600 air flies by Soviet pilots were committed for the war and over 500 times burning and damaged aircraft were sent to the enemy on the ground. In the German Luftwaff, in the same battles, there were collisions in the air, but there was not a single incident of the deliberate, deliberate ramming of a Soviet airplane in the air. The ram is not only a frontal collision of airplanes on the oncoming courses. With the abandonment of weapons, the ammunition that was coming to an end, our pilots shot down the Germans with a blow of the propeller, wing, keel and even the released chassis on the enemy aircraft. That is, they were absolutely conscious, considered and calculated actions of Soviet pilots during the air battle, with the aim of "preventing the enemy from fulfilling his combat mission." But the Germans, it was not. Moreover, even at the end of the War, defending the sky of Germany from the raids of the Soviet Air Force and the more so the raids of the "allies" German pilots did not go to the battering ram. The German command tried to create special suicide teams for this kind of fight, they say, this should scare, first of all, the British and Americans, as it frightened the latter in the sky over the Pacific Ocean and Japan. But the thing died down because of the lack of people willing to sacrifice themselves in real combat, even for the sake of their Motherland-Fterland. Although the point here is not the cowardice of German pilots. Not at all. It may well be that if they attacked Germany, then such cases could have occurred.

 There were in those "terrible Stalin's times" facts, phenomena and norms, which were also completely calmly perceived by society, as a matter of course. Or, at least, was perceived by people as something inevitable in connection with the existing life in the country. For example, such a norm of U.K. RSFSR, as the prosecution of children from 12 years. On this occasion, the "human rights defender" cry: "In some regions of the country, the distraught NKVD officers, using the decree of April 7, 1935, brought to justice even children for" counterrevolution "and" terror "." In fact, they used the "distraught Enkavydyshniki" not by the Decree, and the Resolution of the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR (Central Executive Committee and Council of People's Commissars-Government, USSR). By the way, the "mistake" is made by yelling intentionally, especially since any competent lawyer will explain that the Decree is usually issued by one person or the Presidium (the President in our days), and the Decision is collegial, i.e. government. Even such allegedly "mistakes" are trying to prove that Stalin is to blame for everything. In accordance with this Resolution, criminal responsibility for committing crimes could come from 12 years (now the punishment in Russia for a number of crimes is appointed from 14 years). Hard? Cruelly! Only about one unmaskers have forgotten. First, to make an analysis-comparison of similar criminal norms for other countries of that period. Information is not at all secret, there is in any book on criminology. You can find it without problems and on the Internet. In particular, before the revolution of 1917 in Tsarist Russia, according to the Rules of 1903, juveniles who were ten years of age were subject to criminal liability. In the same "terrible Stalin years", in Italy, Spain - 9 years; in Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark - 10 years; in Germany, Hungary, Romania, Serbia, Switzerland - 12 years. And in these countries in those years the crime rate was a thousand times lower! Secondly, our eternal fighters with the "satrapy" somehow modestly "overlook" the fact that these standards were specifically in the then-Russia-USSR were adopted precisely in connection with the terrible crime that Stalin inherited as a legacy of the Civil War.

Today, a lot of movies about the "rampant crime in the USSR after the Patriotic War" were made up. All these "black cats", Odessa gangs, which could be suppressed only with the help of the Army, are perceived as an inevitable post-war evil, which really had to be fought. But "human rights activists" do not want to believe that after the Civil War things were even worse. The war was going on within Russian society itself. The weapons were not only among the lazy. The country's sex took part in various armies, gangs, partisan detachments. And the children's homelessness was just wild scale. Gangs of juvenile offenders acted even more pohlesche than adults. One might remind our "fighters against despotism" that it was then that all these children were simply caught as stray animals and placed in orphanages and shelters. But only such diseases of society are not treated with one charity. Still, the number of children planted by "insane" Chekists in prisons from the age of 12 is somewhat lower than what the "unmaskers" are trying to impose on us. The norm in the Criminal Code was, but that's only planted on it was not so much, as they say today. And even more so at this age they did not shoot. But just the children of those Stalinist orphanages and special schools of the 1920s, then in 1941 in Brest bayonet karyabali on the wall: "I'm dying. But I'm not giving up. Farewell to the Motherland. " Yes, they threw themselves at the embrasures.

 (In this respect, it is possible to make a comparison with "terrible Stalinist orders during the War", such as Order No. 270 of 1941 and Order No. 227 of 1942, according to which "the families of those who were captured immediately put in jails." Orders There were only 1 million soldiers, then it was necessary to plant a million 3 (!) - mother, father plus wife, or brothers-sisters. just got captured during the War of the Soviet soldiers? Yes, we needed a second largest army to guard all the landed x, several million soldiers. But this army was not in the rear in such numbers. And still "subjected to repression families of missing persons." It is certainly possible to raise the statistics of those years, which for the "whistleblower" is not a decree. And you can conduct a survey of residents of modern Russia on this issue. In each family there are dead and missing soldiers in the War, and those who died in the territories occupied by the Germans. German captives are also found in many families. So what? All these relatives went through the "Stalin Gulag"? And who then stood in the factories at the machine-tools, sharpened shells? Who raised the bread? Solid prisoners? No, the number of prisoners at that time was not more than the number of modern nurses. My own, my own and my great grandfathers and grandmothers went through the War. Someone has survived, someone has disappeared, and someone has been in captivity. So, my relatives .... will score these "human rights activists", for their homeland, for Stalin. )

Or a terrible fairy tale about "the lack of passports from peasants in the countryside during terrible Stalin's times," without which the peasant collective farmers could not leave the collective farm and were doomed to "starving to death in terrible agony" (apparently also from the realization that they were deprived of such a joy of a democratic norm, like "freedom of movement"). Today, for this "joy of democracy" with giblets bought up, once free Serbs and even Montenegrins, from the same name who once shuddered in the Balkans. Today, the Montenegrins of whom have taken the same to the European Union, bear the new proud name of "montenegra". And we, instead of Georgians, have residents of the "georgia", who will soon be admitted to NATO, so that they will fight with Russia in the long run.

 As for the "lack of passports from the peasants under Stalin," one can argue long and tediously, citing facts from the life of the peasants under the tsar, who also did not know passports. It is possible to give an exact date for the appearance of a "Soviet passport" in general, and in the Soviet village in particular. You can speculate about the specific, objective historical realities of those years in the USSR. For example, say that the " freedom of movement" in the USSR, especially for the peasants, was "abolished" in 1934, after Hitler's drive to power in Germany, when it became clear that the next Western War against Russia (USSR) was inevitable. The country gradually began to be transferred to the mobilization department. Similarly, in 1940, the same restrictions in the transition from one job to another were introduced for industrial workers. I think normal historians can bring a lot of facts on this issue. For example, to inform that in the same Germany, the transfer of the country's economy to the mobilization office took place in 1934, almost immediately after Hitler came to power in 1933. At the same time, for all categories of employees, and for workers and peasants, in Germany, were banned from the transition from one job to another. And you can again resort to the "people's memory" and interview the inhabitants of the modern village, the descendants of those "collective farmers oppressed by Soviet power." Alas, I'm not a historian and can only use my family family experience of those years. So, my great-grandfather, who did not love Soviet power very much, on that hungry 32nd, did not want to join the collective farm, on a farm in the steppes of the salsa near Rostov-on-Don, and went to look for a better share. We left here quite normally and legally, not secretly and not crawling, from this farm. Lived for a while in his house near Gagra. Already in the seventies my grandmother showed me from the place where once stood that house, Stalin's dacha. I doubt that the terrible OGPU-NKVD would not know, that in the neighborhood of the dacha Tirana huddled homeless. "The best share" great-grandfather eventually did not find (with work in the south was tugovato) and a few years later brought the family back to the farm. That's just all already lived, like people, after the first difficult years of the formation of collective farm life, and the great-grandfather's family until the war itself could not establish its life. But surely, after 1934, when there was no famine in the USSR (there was no one to organize it in the village, and the collective farm system itself made it possible to keep the situation with "crop failures" under control and redistribute bread in problem areas), my great-grandfather was no longer able to leave his farm. Passports after 1934 were issued in the hands, if the young people went to the city to study, on various business trips. My grandmother left before the war to study at the Pedagogical Institute. But (oh, horror! ) certainly had to return to his native village to teach, but the war prevented. So the peasants of those years on this occasion did not hurt something and "experienced". And even more so they did not ask to "vote" in their defense of such types as Svanidze. They were better then Svanidze understood the whole need for such a step in those specific years. Other people can lead a lot of completely different family stories and are not always fun, butfor a greater "objectivity" it is easier, perhaps, still to look at the objective realities of those years , and not to groan in righteous indignation about the fact that "the poor peasants Stalin regime in the mid-20th century made serfs" and they could not go to the resorts of Turkey.

It would be nice to compare the percentage of "willing" to die for Russia in 1914, in 1941 and at the same time in our days. Not the percentage of traitors should be compared, not wishing to fight for their homeland, or transferred to the side of the enemy and collaborated with him (such always were, is and will be), and the percentage of Sailors, Koshevs, Kosmodemyanskih, Gastello. Anti-Russian propaganda in tsarist Russia (and the Bolsheviks, who had no special access to the mass media until 1917, were still not the most rabid critics of tsarism in this matter) led to the fact that the society simply refused to fight for "that" Russia. Anti-Soviet propaganda under Gorby, the poisoning of the brains of all the people with the spitting of their own history, led to the fact that no one had come out to defend the Soviet power, and even Russia-the USSR, from EBNistov, from the collapse of either 1991 or 1993. The imposition and propaganda of the "terrible truth from the unmaskers", of all these myths and myths about "Stalin's despotism" has been going on for half a century. At the same time, they use both "direct myths" about Stalin and "indirect myths" from a terrible life in Sovdepia, still returning to the personality of Stalin. And the most filthy among them, these are the "myths" about the War. At the same time, the "Myths" about the War in the majority, so or otherwise, is the continuation of the "myths about Stalin".The task of the myths about Stalin initially has one, the main goal - the discrediting of Stalin and all that they did to save Russia from plunder and extermination in the 20th century.In the mythology of the War the same situation. However, the myths about the war were originally created (and always created) to "smear" some and blacken others. The Germans copied everything to the dirt and froze (sometimes not unsuccessfully, even though our fighters had to knead mud and bend in the cold), and to the "demon-crazed Fuhrer". And in our mythology about the War there was a bikik: everything that was bad was from a tyrant despot, and everything that was good (or even great) happened either in itself or through the bold initiative of the generals, despite Stalin's evil will. It turns out funny. That Stalin is omnipotent and omnipresent (when it is convenient for the "unmaskers"). That, such a grandiose military operation, as the transfer of entire armies from the Far Eastern Special Military District (DOVO) to the front and sending conscripts from the central regions of Russia and from Moscow late in the autumn of 1941 (when the Germans were standing near Moscow) to replace them (with duplication of No. v / parts to confuse Japanese intelligence), described in the book "Unknown Stalin" by dissident historians R. and J. Medvedev, was made in "secret" from Him. Probably, if Stalin had "learned" about this operation, then, definitely, it was canceled. They shot all for this "amateur" activity, and sent the recruits to the front not prepared, and in general, would do anything to as many people as possible perished at the front. In R. and J. Medvedev in the "Unknown Stalin" there is a chapter about how General Apanasenko, the commander of the DOVO, In the autumn of 1941, on his own initiative, I conducted a global strategic, military, counterintelligence operation to transfer military units from the DOVO to the front and to Moscow. It seems that in this chapter Stalin is not directly blackened. But when you read, you are waiting for everything, when General Apanasenko, for his "personal" courage, ingenuity and courage, in the rotation of the troops, will seize the NKVD, after rushing to the "black funnels" at night. Although, in fact, the transfer of entire armies under the nose of the Japanese, so much so that they did not notice anything, with duplicated part numbers, is worthy of a textbook at the GSh Academy. But this was done, unequivocally, "against the evil will of the tyrant." That is, any fact from the history of the Second World War is presented in such a way as to expose Stalin as a villain. That Apanasenko "personally" moves troops across the country, then Zhukov Moscow "saves" in spite of the desire of the tyrant to escape, etc., etc. In the film myths they will show us how General Zhukov yells at General Rokossovsky: "Not a step back! Stand to the death! ", For the fact that he suggested withdrawing troops for the Istra Reservoir in order to improve the defense. But they forget to add that in the end the Germans broke, as Rokossovsky had foreseen, and the defense had to be built behind this reservoir, but in worse conditions.

To "strengthen" the legend of how genius Zhukov, for his daring speeches, the "insidious despot" sent to fight at Yelnya, it would be good to show how he, having just arrived, launched an offensive along the entire front, having trained for only a few hours. Although, it is banal, the great marshal simply hastened to be noted as a "victory", after the disgraceful removal of the chief of the General Staff (after the shooting of Pavlov, on which he himself insisted). This was written by V.P. Pentihov in the article "How it was. Reasoning about an order "in" Duel ", No. 52 of 25.12.07. Good thing, the Internet. You can find an extract about the punishment of the leadership of the Air Force in the spring of the 41st, indicating the "reasons". You can pick up about the migrants-Chechens. Different people post different articles and documents. It remains only to choose whose truth is truthful. Maybe you should not spray on the refutation of "indirect" myths, but, probably, it is worth mentioning about their existence and for what they are created. After all, only "Memoirs and Reflections", G.K. Zhukov, who became the "bible" about the war - a set of continuous myths and fairy tales. In any scene where Stalin is present, and even more so GK himself. Zhukov, you see at least a little lies. Georgiy Konstantinovich tells how an evil tyrant removed him from his post as chief of the General Staff for a bold proposal to "leave Kiev". But it is not possible to verify what really happened when Stalin told Zhukov when he removed the post of chief of the General Staff at the end of July 1941, and then, in a month and a half, appointed him to the Reserve Front. And even more so, Georgi Konstantinovich himself will not write about himself, that he was removed from the post of chief of the General Staff and sent as a result of the lowering to the Reserve Front, for the "weak" control of his subordinates (commanders of the districts), who committed their "inaction" the rout of the units entrusted to them, the death of personnel, the loss of military equipment and the surrender of Minsk on the 6th day of the war. It is not known, after all, whether Stalin actually asked Zhukov with a "pain in his soul," say, as a Communist to a communist, Moscow will be given, or will cost. Or, about what Zhukov personally spoke with Rokossovsky, on the withdrawal of troops for Istra? After all, Konstantin Ksaverevich was silent about this in his memories of natural modesty. And about the "reasons" for the removal of Zhukov from the post of Chief of the General Staff recently at the RTR, in d / f "Marshals of Victory" told a new "truth". It turns out that Zhukov Stalin was removed from his post, that he suggested back in September 1941 to transfer troops from the Far East to the front. But the villain did not give the villain, and even removed his "great commander" from office, sending him to the Reserve Front. I would like to remind once again lovers of fairy tales. YetJuly 20, 1941 for the post of Chief of the General Staff, instead of General of the Army G.K. Zhukov, was appointed Marshal of the Soviet Union B.M. Shaposhnikov. Not in September, not in August, but on JULY 20, 1941 !!! More 10 on July to the post of People's Commissar of Defense and Supreme Commander was appointed Stalin himself, Marshal Timoshenko removed and sent to Belarus, to disentangle what the commander of District Pavlov done. And on July 22 , for the collapse of the Western Front, for "weakening the mobilization readiness of the troops," the commander of ZapOVO, Army General, Hero of the Soviet Union, D.G. Pavlov was shot. The first time about the "surrender of Kiev" GK Zhukov really could stutter somewhere in July. But the real threat to the city arose onlyin the beginning of September , after the general situation on the fronts worsened, due to the bad general pre-war preparation of the western districts for the War, which took place under the strict guidance of Georgi Konstantinovich. By this time, Stalin was least interested in the opinion of the former chief of the General Staff (who could not really conduct the Elninsky operation), that on the issue of the "surrender of Kiev", that the transfer of the Ural forces to the front.

22.12.07, on TV passed d / f about how GK Zhukov "fought" with criminals in Odessa. They mentioned that G.K. this boasted in the last interview of his life. But in reality, in all cities (not only in Odessa) after the war there were problems with bandits. The local police, in which many former front-line soldiers joined, everywhere fought hard enough against criminals. It is another matter that local military units were assigned to help them conduct the same raids, and in these round-ups the military "prisoners" were not particularly taken if they resisted. Those. some special merit in suppressing the crime after the War of Comrade. Zhukov is still not there. It happened everywhere. It was necessary to cleanse the country of the bred bandits. And this is rather the "merit" of the country's leadership (and "personally Comrade Stalin"), and not the district commander. So even here G.K. Zhukov noted his "indiscretion" in the appropriation of non-existent "merits". And an indirect myth, one way or another, directed against Stalin went for a walk. However, Georgiy Konstantinovich was a living person.

 Or a beautiful legend about how Admiral Kuznetsov raised the fleet ahead of time in alarm, on his own initiative, " contrary to Stalin's instructions"!! In the light of the documents opened in the archives and published and direct directives of the General Staff on bringing the same Baltic district to a state of increased and full combat readiness, it is simply indecent to talk about some mythical "personal initiative" of the admiral. The same Baltic fleet was structurally subordinated to the command of PribOVO with its headquarters in Riga. And if orders were sent to this district for mechanized corps, about their withdrawal to the frontiers of defense, how could they "forget" about the Baltic fleet in Moscow? Another thing is that there may well be such an option. Specifically, the sailors could and "forget" intends in the General Staff. After all, there was no clear Directive from Moscow with the indication "To declare in the troops and the Navy a full combat readiness!". This formulation put the USSR in the rank of "AGGRESSOR". And Stalin, as the head of state, could not go on such a thing. The instructions were given more concrete, they say, to withdraw such a division, corps, etc. in such and such an area and something like that. It may well be that Kuznetsov "did not receive" clear instructions. And in this situation, of course, he could, "on his own initiative," give the command "to raise the fleet in alarm." And about the commander's activity of Admiral Kuznetsov the same A.B. Martirosyan in his books told one "detail". During the Tallinn transition in July of the 41st Martirosyan in his books told one "detail". During the Tallinn transition in July of the 41st Martirosyan in his books told one "detail". During the Tallinn transition in July of the 41stThe Baltic Fleet lost half of the ships on its way to Kronstadt . Lost on conventional mines, which the Germans set in June-July. But the command and intelligence of the Baltic Fleet "did not notice" how the Germans put these mines, and stupidly drove the ships through the minefields.

 Or Stalin's speech on the radio on July 3, 1941, "Brothers and Sisters ...". In response to the assertion that the RKKA by June 41 was (in fact) brought into the state of the necessary combat readiness, to repulse the aggression of Germany, one can give a good "counterargument" - Stalin's speech, in which he "declares": "As for that that part of our territory was still captured by the German fascist troops, this is mainly due to the fact that the war of fascist Germany against the USSR began under favorable conditions for German troops and unprofitable for the Soviet troops. The fact is that the German troops, as the country leading the war, were already fully mobilized, and 170 divisions, which Germany threw against the USSR and moved to the borders of the USSR, were in a state of complete readiness, expecting only a signal to speak, while the Soviet troops needed to still mobilize and move closer to the borders ... ". However, in these words, all the full truth. All the measures that were taken in the Red Army during the "hidden mobilization" still did not give 100% combat readiness. And in this we are clearly inferior to Germany. But this just gave the USSR the "opportunity" to remain "a victim of aggression". And this is for sure the personal tragedy of Stalin himself - to know that it is necessary to keep the "imidge" of the country at all costs as "sacrifices", knowing that this can lead to casualties, the death of people, but this will lead to victory in the future. And save the rest. And the attacker is always in more "favorable terms", since he "knows" better where he will strike his first blow. And, most importantly, why would Stalin openly "confirm" in his speech, the fact of holding the events in May-June of the 41st to increase the combat readiness in the border districts? To confirm Hitler's accusations of the USSR in "aggressive intentions"? It was this "image of the victim of Aggression" that did not allow us to shoot down German planes that regularly flew into our territory. They tried to force them to plant, but not to shoot down.

 The mishmash and clogging in people's heads is just wild. And, the more literate and "more readable" a person is, the stupider his fantasies about Stalin. My friend, a teacher in a military school, fully agreeing with me on the degree of readiness of the USSR to the war in 1941, knowing better than I how the scientific degrees of candidates of all sciences are given (talked to him about Colonel GS Khodorenka, who called Directive No. 1 "unprofessional "And" strange ", in his research), then he began to repeat the traditional nonsense about Stalin. I had to drag him to the bookstore, show the book of Martirosyan AB. "Who led the war in the USSR?", To show "The Great Obliged ..." I. Pykhalov and the books of other Mukhins and Isaevs. So, that, the work of the "Stalinists" ahead is more than enough. Especially, that after reading Martirosyan's books and his "myths", questions about other "myths" pop up. So you can debunk mythology for a long time. Already 70 years, as the first appeared, and accumulated so many, and so much driven into the head that the work of these authors are provided for a long time. You can release Add-ons, Applications, Comments to these books.

 Theories from the CPSU, that the USSR won, above all, because of the "right" ideology are not serious at all. They won it all, first of all, because the Stalinist socialist economy was "right". But it was precisely the CPSU that after Stalin destroyed this economy, having introduced the very "equalization" in wages, having discouraged the working man from working and raising labor productivity. Then no "ideology" could save the USSR. Hitler could not make his economy completely centralized and manageable. After all, Germany was still a capitalist, "market" economy. If our designers were tasked to maximally reduce the cost of weapons, seeking to release more tanks and aircraft for the same money (if possible, without reducing the TTX), then for German designers the development of new models of technology was also a way to earn extra money. In addition, the Tigger and the Panther need adaptations for underwater driving, or stabilizers for firing on the move (which the Germans still could not do), or stupid skates (in "staggered" order) for "smooth running", weighted tank and complicated the repair in the troops? Or night sights, in the open spaces of Russia and in the steppes of Ukraine? After all, just at night the Germans preferred not to fight. In the end, with the same material costs, Germany produced far fewer tanks and aircraft, having behind it all the economic might of Europe. At the same time, the "allies" bombed the peaceful cities of Germany more than military enterprises, especially those that were supposed to, then to withdraw to them under control. And the German children at the machines did not stand with their mothers to defeat the hateful Russia, even in the 44th-45th. A fairy tale that German technology was better than the Soviet much is not worth it. They win not the "comfortable" tanks, but the best. In the end, there is an analysis of the loss of technology from our and the German side, from the same M. Isaev and Mukhin YI, there is documentary statistics on this subject, after all.

Or the Germans' craving for "miracle weapons"? All these "FAA", "stormworks" (allegedly copied by Kalashnikov), "faust patrons" that "burned" all our tanks in Berlin, jet fighters, which played no special role in repelling the raids of the "allies" against Germany. The mass and simple weapons won, and not the "miracle", produced in a small amount. An analysis of these fairy tales has shown great, Pikhalov in "The Great, Forsaken ..." and Isayev in "Anti-Suvorov. 10 myths ... ". And the same Martirosyan A.B. collected all this together and processed in an accessible presentation in such a volume as a five-volume "200 myths about Stalin" and five-volume "200 myths about the Great Patriotic War."

 Among the many myths and myths about the War there is one very naughty tale about the fact that the losses of the Red Army during the War were much higher than those of the Germans in the Wehrmacht, they say, Stalin "piled up the Germans with the corpses of his soldiers". But, firstly, any belligerent state underestimates its losses during the conduct of combat operations, and overstates its losses. Can certainly reach and to marasmus in these "calculations". What can you do, nowhere so do not lie, like hunting, fishing and war. And even more so among the military. Secondly, for our "unmaskers" from history, German data is the most data in the world! After all, the Germans are so pedantic (they say with a gasp our fans of the West) and just do not know how to lie. And the fact that the propaganda apparatus of Goebbels could lie - God forbid. And then, that the losses of the Wehrmacht in the spring of 1945 from the Germans were simply unaccounted for by objective reasons and due to the too rapid offensive of the Soviet Army, this is not important. And even more so when you can always speculate on this topic by comparing the total total losses of the army and the civilian population of the USSR to the losses of Germany, in which the share of civilians is incomparably smaller than ours. As the General GA Gareev remarked remarkably, if we, having entered the territory of Germany, organized a "competition" with the Germans, destroying the civilian population, then their losses would be enormous. And we also like to posten about the fact that no one killed killed. But just now everyone can see for himself on this issue - they believed, or did not consider, took into account, or did not take into account how and when.

 In 2007, the Archive of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, "In accordance with the List of Orders of the President of the Russian Federation of April 23, 2003, No. pr-698 on the organization of military memorial work in the Russian Federation and Decree of January 22, 2006 No. 37" Questions perpetuating the memory of the deceased in defense of the Fatherland , the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation established a Generalized Computer Data Bank containing information on the defenders of the Fatherland, who were killed and missing during the Great Patriotic War, as well as in the post-war period (OBD Memorial), on the website www.obd-memorial.ru \\"Memorial" data on the dead and missing Soviet soldiers and officers during the Great Patriotic War. Today any citizen can find his deceased and missing father, grandfather, etc. That is, on his own example, on the example of his family, personally check out the tale about "the soldiers killed in the War who were not reckoned by the terrible Evil Stalin". My own grandfather, Kozinkin Stepan Mikhailovich, born in 1909, native of Art. Samashki, in vague family legends and memories of his wife (my grandmother) Kozinkina Praskovia Mironovna, in the girlhood Podzolko Pr.M., whom I myself asked about my grandfather in the late 1980s, in the summer and autumn of 1941 volunteered for the War. I got into some kind of "Wild Division", a cavalry unit formed in Grozny. In 1942, the grandmother received a notice on the missing husband. The notice itself was lost with the years, and information remained, from the words of fellow friends returning from the War, that the grandfather had disappeared somewhere near Stalingrad, in 1942. Remained after the German shelling in neutral, where they climbed in turns for the killed horses. As I myself could figure out on the basis of my own military experience, in this situation, the unit commander must check the "presence of personnel" and report on possible losses. Among the living, wounded and dead, who were in their trenches, there was no grandfather. Report on the "unauthorized" leaving the fighter position, company commander, or platoon did not. All were from one city or even a district, and were not going to report on a friend who had left behind a dead horse, who could be accused of desertion (Order No. 227 already acted), with all possible consequences for the wife and children. Yes, and "platoon vanke" ass assail for such a report. And they just wrote that they were missing. True, the grandmother after the war never received a pension for her deceased husband. But these are only my assumptions based on family traditions. It could have happened and it's easier. The regiment fought and retreated. And the fighters remaining on the battlefield were automatically written off as "missing persons". But with the advent of the "Memorial" site (not to be confused with the "human rights defenders"), the history of my grandfather's last battle and the place of this battle became a documentary fact. A little about the Site. The Generalized Data Bank "Memorial" shows at leastfive types of records of deaths, missing persons and those who died from wounds in hospitals. The first record - "Reports on the irrevocable losses" of the units and units in which the person served, compiled immediately after the battles, an average for the past month. These reports were compiled, for example, by the chief of staff of a cavalry regiment, even in the days of the summer retreat of 1941, and even more so in subsequent years of the War. This is simply part of the direct duties of these officers. The second account was recorded in hospitals and medical battalions for the deceased from wounds. The third account was taken immediately after the war through military commissariats.

 All RVCs (military enlistment offices) for the "Main Directorate for the calculation of casualties of the rank and file of the Red Army" compiled "List Form 2 / BP (irrevocable losses) for the missingRed Army soldiers, families who do not have notices. According to some documents in the hands of the families of the missing servicemen (letters, certificates and other documents). " This form was presented "for the deportation of official notices to the families of the missing". For example, the RVC from which my grandfather was called was in Grozny, he was not evacuated anywhere. But the data of the RVC of the western regions also did not disappear anywhere in large numbers. This, in fact, the "offices" of the People's Commissariat of Defense and their documentation and archives in the rear were evacuated no worse than military and civilian factories. It was only in the Byelorussian District that the Germans captured Minsk a week after the outbreak of the war. In other places, the evacuation of documents was quite enough. Moreover, all RVC documents are closed to regional Military registration and enlistment offices in large regional centers, where they were all the more able to take them out. So, this post-war accounting was probably still not for laughs, but for clarifying the number of those killed in the war and counting the exact number of all the dead. This account certainly lay on the table not only of the Ministry of Defense, but probably on the table of Stalin. It seems that Stalin somehow even mentioned in a narrow circle, they say, we lost about 30 million people of our citizens in the War. Why were these numbers not announced? Brain strained, "gentlemen unmasked" - haters. " At the end of the 1940s (and accounting for only 112 conscripts of the Molotov RVC in Grozny, where my grandfather was marked, was compiling for two months and finished all analysis of losses to the Defense Ministry not in one year), raise the issue of the dead at the hands of the Germans and their Hungarian allies, Romanians and other "Europeans" who by this time became our "allies" about almost 30 million dead citizens of the Soviet Union was simply impossible for the same political reasons. If the "unmaskers" of these things do not understand, then as they say, I'm not guilty. And for citizens of our country, this "truth" in those years was of little use. Then I would have to start talkingthe entireThe truth about the specific culprits of this death of the Soviet people, about all those whose execution of their official duties led to the defeat of the Army in 1941, the occupation of a third of the country, the subsequent hijacking of our citizens to Europe for work, etc. etc. . So, at that time, at the end of the 1940s, the wall, after the Pavlovs and many other generals, was put up to the People's Commissar of Defense in 1941 with the chief of the General Staff for the company. I ask the salt-falcon and other svanidz not to strain - in this situation, Stalin could not be any guilty. He then, exactly, fulfilled his duties as head of state until the end. And most importantly, Stalin was not interested in dismantling the military, guilty of killing so many people. Haters are like a sickle in one place, but still was not Stalin "a bloodthirsty despot", even though you will hammer. He was just a normal ruler, and nothing more. And certainly more intelligent than all of our "fighters against Stalinism." (Why did Stalin not want to put generals in the wall after the war for such losses? The counter question is, do you know a lot of countries where such "disassembly" would begin to happen? Oh, yes, in the West, that's what they always do. it's just for our country that the "fighters against totalitarianism" want a big and clean truth in everything. Just something tells me that these "fighters" do not have much sincerity and are not entirely motivated by these people.) where would they arrange such "disassembly"? Oh, yes, in the West that's what it always does. And further. For some reason it is precisely for our country that "the fighters against totalitarianism" want big and pure truth in everything. Just something tells me that just these "fighters" are not enough sincerity and not quite the sense of justice is driven by these people.) where would they arrange such "disassembly"? Oh, yes, in the West that's what it always does. And further. For some reason it is precisely for our country that "the fighters against totalitarianism" want big and pure truth in everything. Just something tells me that just these "fighters" are not enough sincerity and not quite the sense of justice is driven by these people.)

The fourth account was taken in the late 1980s, early 1990s. In addition to the re-counting of the losses, there was also an account for the " Flood lists ". If your relative is on this list, then you can now find his grave. There is also the fifth account, the most mournful for our citizens. This is the recording of prisoners on lists in German concentration camps.

So, my own grandfather found himself counted two times. The first time for "reporting of irrecoverable losses shelf" it passes as K and Zinkin Stepan ( surname undisclosed ) 1909 b, soldier, smith 1st squadron 255 separate Checheno-Ingushsky Cavalry (POI most "Wild Division" ), a native of Grozny, ul. Gamangurskaya, 18, having a wife K a zinkin Pr. M., called Molotovsky RVC CHIASSR, Molotov district of Grozny and missing on August 5, 1942 near the station. Chilykovo (on the railway line from Kotelnikovo station to Stalingrad, on which the 14th panzer division of the Germans was approaching these days ). Report on341 soldiers and officers, dead, missing and captured since August 1, for two months of fighting (mainly fighting for this station on August 4 and 5, 1942) was September 26, 1942, the commander of the regiment, captain Emelianov. Incidentally, in this list of dead and missing for this damn station, more than half were Chechens and Ingush (not to be confused with those "freedom-loving mountaineers" of different nationalities that at that time they were hastening through the mountains, and because of which Beria had to evict the civilian population in the whole Caucasus - this rabble went "to the mountains" only after receiving a weapon, and even earlier). Most of the regiment's list "disappeared", but this station remained in that August with the Germans. So our soldiers were buried either by local residents, or by the funeral teams of the Germans, or by our surviving soldiers after the battle. Someone of those "missing" could of course be captured (although those who were captured are also indicated in that "Report"). But my grandfather in the "German" lists do not pass and the handout from Germany to our relatives, thank God, does not threaten.

The second time the grandfather passes on the lists of the RVK drawn up in 1947, according to his wife, Podzolko Praskovia Mironovna. Here it is shown, as K o zinkin Stepan Mikhailovich, born in 1909, a native of Art. Samashki Grozny region, called on 30.12.1941 by Molotovsky RVC of the Chechen-Ingush ASSR, Molotov district of Grozny, ul. Chervlenaya, 49 and "retired" (missing) 02.1942 (from the words of his wife disappeared in December 1941). Duplication was due to the fact that, first, the surname was written differently by different clerks - it correctly sounds and is written through "a". Second, before the war, they lived with their children at their relatives on the same street, and then the grandmother moved to the next, in the same quarter. Before the war, it was held as K azinkin, and after the war, without waiting in the 45th and finally "burying" her husband, was already called her maiden. Then, not having arranged the fate with three children on hands, changing the passport, has registered under a surname of the lost husband, but already as K o zinkina. In our surname, letters are always confused when writing, and after half a century almost all relatives write their surname through "o", although it is more correct to write through "a". Thus, an outsider will necessarily consider my grandfather in the loss lists twice, as two completely different people. By the way, due to the fact that in the regimental reports there was simply not enough space in the column of the full name, the person's middle name could not be written. And because of this, today's relatives, they can not always find their "own" soldier.

In the Odessa Special Military District in the 74th Infantry Division of the 360th Infantry Regiment the elder brother of my other native grandmother met the War, the superintendent sergeant Kachurin Nikolai Semenovich, born in 1913, born in 1913. (great-grandfathers, from the Don farms, called "Kachura"). He disappeared without a trace on August 3, 1941. It takes place twiceon the "Nominee list of servicemen with whom the written communication ceased and which relatives seek through the Central Bureau for Accounting for Losses" under Nos. 19 and 54. At the same time, the record under No. 54 is clearly erroneous, in the lists it is crossed out with a wavy line, but on the Internet the person is still taken into account . The list was drawn up in the 4th department of the Loss Department on 26.07.1943, the head of the department, Colonel Mitrofanov, at the request of relatives (either parents or his wife). His wife, Kachurina Anastasia Vasilievna, lived in the Krasnodar Territory, the village of Ust-Labinskaya, st. Communist, 174. During the war she left for Mordovia, in the town of Ruzaevka. And now Kachurin Nikolai Semenovich, born in 1913, is also listed in the book "In Memory of the Republic of Mordovia. Volume 7 ", who died in battle in August 1941, as a resident of Ruzaevka, the Mordovian ASSR. third time. At the same time, all the soldiers from this book have nationality, but NS Kachurin is not listed. Apparently the authors of this Book could not determine the nationality of a man with a strange name, common among the inhabitants of the Don steppes. But the fact that these two Kachurin are also the same person, only our relatives know.

If someone thinks that such a duplication is an isolated case, you can check for yourself and your friends and friends on the example of your relatives and friends. I also personally tested my uncle's neighbor in the house, named Nikolai Ivanovich Kislyy, born in 1923, the guard of the senior sergeant of the 45th Guards Rifle Division, 612 LAP (light artillery regiment) who died from wounds on February 27, 1945 in the medical battalion, in the Baltic States . He passes the dead three times: - on the "Report on the irretrievable losses" of the 45th Guards Rifle Division; - according to the documents of Medsanbat, where he died the same day; - and according to the "Famous List of Graves", cemeteries in the city of Priekule. Also the photo of this cemetery, with the burial scheme and the number of the grave of the soldier is given. An attentive researcher will easily bring these "three" soldiers into one person. But also on the site there is his full namesake, but only junior lieutenant Nikolai Kislyi, Priluki RVK, Chernigov region, p. Ohhinki. Born in 1923, who died of wounds a year earlier, on February 18, 1944. A man passes it twice . According to the "Report ..." 340 rifle division and the "Report ..." 433 msb (medsanbata). And again writing then a paper clerk in the medical battalion, in with. Ochinky wrote instead of the capital letter "and ", capital" sh ". It turned out in the text an extra stick and came out with. Ohshnki . And already another person has read it already as with. Ohlenki. As a result, because of this, this officer is also taken into account twice, and can be taken into account twice in the general loss lists.

So many Red Army soldiers who died in this war, counted up to two times. If it went missing, it was rechecked after the War of the District Military Committee (RVK). If he died of wounds, he is shown, and in hospital lists, and in the lists of his unit. If he simply died in battle, he could only be marked once with his own part. But then there are repetitions because of the errors of the clerks in writing the name, in writing the place of residence, in recording their relatives' data, and for making mistakes in the data on the soldier, etc. The site administrators themselves wrote:

"To date, 9.8 million digital copies of the documents of the Central Archives of the Ministry of Defense have been introduced in the HBS for the irreversible losses of the Great Patriotic War period ( about 8.6 million persons ), more than 30,000 passports of existing military burial sites in the Russian Federation and abroad (from the lists of buried in them - about 2.4 million records), as well as other archival documents specifying losses (funerals, hospital documents, trophy cards of Soviet prisoners of war, etc. - by 9 million records ). In total, there are 20 million records in the HBS (not to be confused with the total number of combat losses - 8.5 million people). Comparison of information from all these sources will allow supplementing and refining the data from the primary source - front - line reports on losses. In addition, the wide access to information about the dead and the missing soldiers through the Internet documentally refutes the falsification of pseudo-historians regarding the number of losses of the Soviet Army during the Great Patriotic War. " (Apparently" the calculations from the reptilian Sokolov "got everyone already)

Also, the website of the Defense Ministry "Memorial" asks all Russian citizens to report on the inaccuracies found by them when searching for their relatives to order the list of those killed in the War. Soldier: " Dear users of the OBD Memorial! In the created search database, there may be inaccuracies due to a number of objective causes of wartime: drafting documents in conditions of combat operations, illiteracy of clerks, peculiarities of spelling of names and surnames, fading text, poor quality of compiling some documents, their dilapidated state and much more. 1. If you want to report any inaccuracies in the database, please, for each record to be correct, specify: - Record number; - Surname, Name and patronymic of the serviceman; - Your information for correction. 2. If you found inaccuracy, error or inconsistency in the documents themselves, then in the message itself, state the essence of your clarification and the requisites of the documents on the basis of which you came to this conclusion about the non-compliance ... "

There was one more group of those killed in the War. Militiamen and mobilized front-line cities. My wife's grandfather, Alexander Fedorovich Savelev, born in 1909, worked in Stalingrad at a tractor plant. His wife and son were able to leave the city under bombings and get to their relatives under Penza, but he stayed at the plant. It seems that together with other workers it was mobilized to build a ferry across the Volga in August-September 1942 to the construction units with 64 armies, took part in battles and perished. But on the website of the "Memorial", among the two dozen Savelevs, who are in the ranks of the Red Army, we do not seem to have our kind. But there are two Savelievs on the lists of burials. But unfortunately in these lists, on these two, except for the name. man, and the date of death is nothing more. But in any case, the person did not disappear at all. Among the 20 full namesake of Savelyevs, mentioned twice was "just" two. One, sergeant, passes twice in the same military cemetery, with one date of death, called from the Yaroslavl region. Other "two", machine gunners, have the same year of birth, one day of death in July of the 43rd, one burial place near Orel and one name of the wife's patronymic living in the neighboring regions, Ulyanovsk and Kuibyshev (Samara), but in one village council.

I do not want to upset our entire code of "haters to Stalin's satrapy", but it seems that the lists of those killed in the War of our soldiers and officers are not only not understated, but they can also be overestimated by a couple of hundred thousand people (if not more!). By the number of captured prisoners we are superior to the Germans, and for this we must thank our "fathers-commanders" for this. But then it turns out that with a general, approximately equal loss of the German and Soviet armies for the entire war (approximately 8 million people ) , but taking into account the dead in captivity (ours killed approximately 2 million, and the Germans 1 million), our soldier and officer fought more skillfully on the battlefield than the German? But in any case, not at all worse. And this is our flag, after all, was hoisted over Berlin.

And certainly it will now be difficult to suck from the finger all the Sokolov bad tsifiri about the number of those killed in the war. By the number of dead civilians, too, will have to upset the "children of innocently repressed victims of repression." Registration of civilians in the country is conducted through registrars. And these offices were in general subordinated to the terrible Lavrenty Pavlovich. Something tells me that this "villain" did not lose papers in the offices during the evacuation. What good can you get into the GULAG !!! So, "gentlemen accountants" are sokolovs and the like, you scratch it all on ... retire, and do not meddle with your delusions toward decent people.

 

Or, for example, stories that Hitler completely "refused to believe the reports of his military attachés about the real military potential of the Russians." Actually, the attaché is reported not to Hitler himself, but to his immediate superior Admiral Canaris. And the head of the German intelligence of the Abwehr, Admiral Canaris, maintaining "close, friendly" relations with the British intelligence, slightly corrected these reports of his scouts-attaches in the direction of reducing the power of the USSR. Fulfilling the interests of England, receiving from the British "more accurate" information about the military-political potential of the USSR-Russia, reported to Hitler "deuce" and plunged his people into a war with the USSR. However, it may very well be that Canaris himself "believed" in what he reported to the Fuhrer about the military capabilities of the Red Army, the USSR. Remember also the wonderful film "Variant" Omega ", the protagonist of which, Mr. Schlosser was just fired from the service in front of the War for being a military attaché in Moscow, he too insistently reported to Hitler (and Canaris) about the tank potential of the "Russians". But he was fired not because the Fuhrer "did not want to hear bad news" about the Red Army and the USSR. But because his reports were too different from the line of Canaris and the English. It seems that this story is not directly glued to any side to Stalin. But it works, as a general scheme of the myth of the comparative "similarity of the two tyrants." And at the level of the subconscious mind the thought is pummeled, they say, both of them - twin brothers, equally "did not trust their great and visionary generals and generals", "did not trust their intelligence".

Many historian researchers, even those who advocate Stalin and all that he did for Russia, and even more so those who hate him, almost all "work" with one chronic dogma about Hitler. This dogma is that Hitler is the fiancé of Ada, an independent character that appeared on the turbid wave of German revanchism, the poverty of post-war devastation in Germany, for which the German people gladly voted because the demagogy and babbling of the Social Democrats were boring everyone to death. This dogma is very convenient to the West, invented by the West, and our historians, who knowingly and maliciously, and most either ignorantly or without considering it important, repeat this "historical truth". In the books of many fans and supporters of Stalin, this "truth" sounds something like this, "Stalin saved the world from the invasion of fascism," or "saved the world from the brown plague." In this phrase everything seems to be true, but in fact, not very much. Stalin really "saved the world from fascism", but there is one question, "but the world wanted to be saved?". But the most important "truth" consists precisely in the fact that this very "German fascism" was born of this very western world. And the citizens of this Western world, the presence in their world of this very "fascism" somehow did not really bother. And the generation did not happen figuratively, not in itself, spontaneously and accidentally, because of some mythical "historical processes". This "generation" has "parents", time and place of "conception" and "birth." At the same time, a small detail of the "choice of the German people" is also not very well publicized. This very people, in fact, did not really vote for Hitler, although the money for the pre-election promotion of the Nazi Party after 1929 was not small. In the end, Hitler at the last elections in the Reichstag took hardly more than 30%. Become a Reich chancellor, as a party leader who did not gain more than 50%, he could not by law. And then they used the small amendment to the German laws adopted in 1932 ("just in case"), that the German president can appoint any person, at least a janitor, as the Reich Chancellor (prime minister). And although Hindenburg "the corporal" could not stand and despised, but he was "persuaded" to appoint Hitler as head of the German government (it seems that the son of Hindenburg was slightly embroiled in bribes, and the president was pressured). Most historians in their books constantly miss another important point. This very "fascism" was grown and sponsored in Germany by the hands of the same England and the United States purposefully and with only one purpose - to send it to the USSR (Russia) for the physical extermination of the population of this country. One can safely add here the words of Margaret Thatcher, said by her in the 1980s that there are enough tens of millions of people living in Russia to service resources in Russia. Only with the appearance over Russia of a nuclear umbrella created by Stalin and Beria (the "hands of prisoners"), the West has disappeared the desire to transfer to Russia by war. At the same time, the very desire to take control of Russia's resources has not gone away. Just the methods have changed. However, if in five years the missiles that are on alert have a technical suitability term (STP), and they will not be replaced by new ones, especially on nuclear submarines, then the time for a soft attack from the West will end. Immediately, the "new Hitler" in the person of some leader of the same "Islamic extremism" will be found and grown up.

So, as soon as historians begin to expose Hitler as an independent figure that appeared on the wave of "German revanchism," they thereby, first, turn all their research into an empty chatter about "details" and "details." And secondly, consciously or not, but take the reader aside, into mythology. Hitler would have remained a "beer spunk" in world history if Stalin had not thrown Trotsky out of the Soviet Union in 1929, finally devouring the West's hopes that Leiba Davidovich could regain such a power once close to him in the Soviets. Only after thatthe haphazard party of the "National Socialist workers" to get seats in the German parliament "suddenly" suddenly began to receive "sponsorship" money from well-wishers for promotion. The focus of the "revolution" and the seizure of power by the Nazis in Germany by force could no longer pass, since the same Communists (supported by the same Stalin through the Comintern) had a fairly large influence in Germany and would simply kill the "beer coup plotters" themselves. But the completely "civilized" arrival of Hitler to the Government through the elections was quite acceptable. We often rub that Hitler was sharply given money by the German industrial and financial structures that "feared" the coming to power of the German Communists, and in a democratic way, including through elections to the German parliament. But here is not the whole truth. And here he gives mythology. It's like in the history of "German money" in the history of Lenin. The money went through the German various non-governmental foundations and structures, but not only "sponsors" from the German General Staff were "sponsors". It was the same in the history with Hitler. He was chosen precisely because, like Lenin in the Russian Empire, he favorably distinguished himself from other candidates and candidates with his personal power of the Leader, the ability to lead (ie, have the makings of a leader), cynical unprincipledness and easy to shed human blood. All the rest is "ideological, racial" and other design, for the West just a tinsel, and tinsel is very even profitable. Helped to come to the Authorities of these types, with their "extremist" ideology (as nowadays they are sponsoring the Benladenes in Kosovo), then one can always openly declare to them the same war,

 At one time, Lenin did his job, finished off the Romanov empire, flooding it with the blood of the Civil War. But at some point he began to get out of control, imagining himself an "independent politician," and immediately received his own "oiled curare" bullets, which later became a plant. His place was to be occupied by Leiba Bronstein (Trotsky) and his comrades, who at that time occupied the main places in the country's leadership, up to the regional authorities. NEP, under the leadership of Trotsky, would turn the country into a banal raw material appendage of the West, under the control of all kinds of "concessionaires", followed by the dismemberment of Russia into national "republics" completely controlled by the West. What is happening today on the expanses of the used and around the USSR. If the plans of the West for "Bronstein and K" were realized, then there would not have been any Hitler's drive to power in Germany, the Second World would simply not exist, and only experienced historians in Germany in the 1920s knew about Hitler's existence, and some intelligence workers who worked on it at the same time. After all, the world by this time was already divided between the winners of the First World War. Germany would have its place in the world structures (as it now has its place in the united Europe), and all the crises in Germany would have come to naught. But 1/6 of the sushi of the planet to the West did not become controlled. Therefore, Hitler became Hitler, and all his military companies in Europe, with rather little blood, were conducted only in order to prepare for the future Unavoidable War against Russia. Those who "doubt" the close "cooperation" of Hitler with Britain and the US behind it, there is a good argument. Like, for Hitler for all his 12 (only!) Years of government was committed almost with fifty attempts. And behind them stood not only the mythical "German patriots". But actually, all these "attempts" that Hitler "miraculously" avoided, are more like some kind of dramatization. Maybe some of them were organized by Hitler's people. But some of them are more like the work of Western special services. And they had a purpose in reminding the Fuhrer that he was being closely watched, and if he, God forbid, would turn in the wrong direction, then the "miracles" would end and attempts could become quite successful. Something like the experiments of grandfather Pavlov over the dogs, the dog went the wrong way - a discharge of current to her in one place.

Would it be good, or bad for Russia, the version of History with Bronstein at the head? How to look. If you are satisfied with the role of the servants of the "owners" (their own, or overseas, not particularly important), then it is probably good. There is no war, people in the battles "For the Motherland!", "For Stalin!" Do not perish - what's wrong with that. True, the population of the Former Russia is either doomed to extinction, not in German concentration camps and ghettos, either "in a natural way", or from the bestial conditions of existence (as it does these days). This is because only the Germans were going to not only destroy the "Jewish communist power" in Russia, but they also planned to physically "dilute" the people themselves, "liberated from Jews and Communists" and, like "honest people," did not hide it. And the West would have acted much more "humanely". However, Russia's choice is always not great. Either fight, or die. But the most interesting, that no one in the West was going to allow Hitler to win in this War with Russia. Growing up Hitler, sending that to Russia, the West was not going to have in the future a crazy competitor, who owns the resources of the whole Eurasian continent. The USA (the faithful pupils of England, who came to replace it in the world Hegemony), saw its role in the "Liberation Mission" in Europe and Russia. At the expense of the blood of Russians and other Europeans, the United States enters the "Great Game" as the bearers of democracy and the "rescuers of all from Hitler" and from various other "totalitarian regimes". Poor US and still bear this heavy cross. In Russia, under the influence of military defeats, a change of power was to take place on some Mikoyan (conditionally), and even the old Kerensky would be dragged with a Democrat's shoal on a steamer from America, as at the time, in 1917

On the possibility of such a "Revolution" in the USSR during the War, the same Mikoyan "let it through", in his stories about how they, the Politburo members, while Stalin "hid" at the dacha, came up with T-bills, decided to put Stalin at the head, . Stalin "had respect among the people." Like, when on June 30 the 41st came to the dacha, where "Stalin, who had fallen into prostration," was hiding, he was "scared", thinking that they had come to arrest him. If you do not pay attention to bad fantasies from Mikoyan, it turns out that Stalin knew perfectly well that such scenario is quite possible in the case of the War and took certain measures. No wonder the American ambassador to the USSR in the 41st year said, they say, Russia does not have such a large-scale betrayal, as in European countries, also because Stalin virtually confiscated the "fifth column" before the war. Maybe not all, but those who stayed, could only finely, or large, shit, but the seizure of power will not be solved. All "Carbonarians" also need the support of the population in order not only to come to power "by killing the Tsar", but the main thing is to stay on it. So Stalin knew about the possibility of such a situation, but also how the old revolutionary also understood that it is unlikely that any of the remaining "Lenin guardsmen" will decide on this in the USSR with the outbreak of the war. And Stalin always knew and remembered exactly where Hitler came from. So, and modern historians who write about that time, we should never forget about who, how and why Hitler came to power, and about the other machinations of our sworn friends in the West.

I would like to say a few words to the amateurs, and at the same time to the subversive ones of the "conspiracy theory". Someone considers "Zionists" responsible for the drive of the same Hitler to power, someone "Masons", someone "British intelligence". I want to disappoint everyone. "Zionism," "British intelligence," "Masons," and other "secret behind-the-scenes structures" are just tools in the hands of the real "masters of the planet"(as they themselves consider). These friends, heads of global financial and industrial corporations, true "internationalists", and "poor Jews" are not the majority among them. This "elite" brings to the US presidents the actors of the Reagan or "clowns" Bush (but more often they are people from the same circle), and in Europe puts under the president a lady without complexes. She, this "elite", "decides" in which region of the planet a war is needed, and in what will endure the end of a sadist and a cannibal. Moreover, such a type will also "help" come to power in some Iran. Yes, so that this dushman his whole life (until he is strangled) will blindly believe that he came to power "independently." This fighter with "Jewish Zionism and American imperialism" will lead his oil region to war with the West and will fully fulfill that task,well control"New masters, as happened in Iraq. In this company, in the club for interests, there are no permanent members. It has no nations. There will be a need - let the same Zionists go to sausage for a sweet soul, they will arrange a "next holocaust" for them. There are many Masonic presidential candidates who are dangling under their feet. Power is in the hands of those who have money. And these are just extras for the public. And the "Masons" and "English intelligence officers" have something to eat and something to eat. And those who contain them and are the "masters of the world." They are not going on Wednesday to "secret meetings" to unleash another world crisis, or to take control of some region of the planet. Just for this, there are "CIA", "Mossad", "Mi-6" and other "masons". And the owners just need to exchange a telephone opinion about some Iraq with Iran,

So do not forget our historians some "aspects" of the world's "backstage". For example, the publicist and historian S. Kremlev wrote in his book "Beria. The best manager of the XX century "such a phrase, saying that Stalin" was an underestimation of the prospects and the possibility of a strategic partnership with Germany against the Anglo-Saxons after the conclusion of the Pact of 1939 ". Like, this would be a nightmare for the West and would have allowed to avoid the War with Germany. But the fact is that Stalin can be "glad to go" to such a "Union", and he was thinking about such an "opportunity". But who would let Hitler go for it? The author lost sight of the behind-the-scenes of those years, forgot for a second who and for what led Hitler to the Power, and immediately made the wrong conclusion.Do not have an independent ruler there are no options for independent behavior !

Although the rest of the book is the Kremlin's LP. Beria is very interesting and convincing. Stalin, as a "faithful companion and pupil of Lenin," was well versed in all the World Cuisine that brews "world revolutions." Therefore, he went to any negotiations with Hitler. But at the same time he could do only one thing - to delay the beginning of the Inevitable War.When they say that Stalin himself could have been interested in the War with the West in the person of Germany and was about to attack, even if Germany "suddenly changes his mind", then this is almost the truth. He knew that War was inevitable. I knew about the role of the West in this war, and about the role of Hitler. I knew what role Russia is preparing. And understanding the inevitability of this war, Stalin prepared for this war. Prepared and won. This Stalin said back in the early 30's, that if the West wants War, then he will get it. On May 5, 1941, Stalin set up the graduates-officers for a "warlike harmony", calling on the War "offensive", urging them not to be afraid of Germany. Stalin never hid that the USSR needed "friendly regimes" around the perimeter. It's another matter that Stalin was not the first to attack. In contrast to the rezonov and other sokolovyh-corned beef, Stalin was still an intelligent man. Yes, I was preparing for the War. Yes, he was going to win in it and "plant" pro-Russian "regimes" around the USSR. But in any case, do not attack first.