March 13th, 2015 , 01:30 pm
“Russia is not a trading state, nor an agricultural one, but a military one, and its calling is to be a thunderstorm of light.”, - Russian Emperor Alexander III.
________________________________________ _____________________
Let's turn to the hysterical facts. But first, to the report of the Minister of War of Imperial Russia 1898-1904 Alexei Nikolaevich Kuropatkin: commander of troops in Manchuria during the Russo-Japanese War, commander of the army in the First World War, and the Northern Front in 1916, Turkestan Governor-General in 1917, leader of the suppression Central Asian uprising, author of many military-historical and military-geographical works. Where he presented a memorandum to Tsar Nicholas II, in which he cited many facts that Russia was constantly in a state of war! Despite the fact that the general did not touch upon the period from the first coup in the Horde and the founding of the Moscow Principality, which became the progenitor of the Russian Empire, it is clear that the entire history of Russia consists of wars!
The minister realized that it was in the war that Russia played a major role, and with his report he wanted to push the emperor to adhere to a tougher state policy, following the example of his predecessors. What was in the report? We read: “Your Imperial Majesty! During the 18th and 19th centuries, Russia spent 128 years in wars, and only 72 years were peaceful.” Of the 128 years of war, only five can be called defensive, and all the rest are exclusively aggressive campaigns."
The list of wars and (or) hostilities provides an opportunity to take a closer look at both the nature of military conflicts: internal, international, foreign internal, in which the state of Muscovy, the Russian Empire, the RSFSR, the USSR, the Russian Federation participated, and the time periods during which they participated in such conflicts.
I. Brief chronology of wars waged by Muscovy, the Russian Empire, the RSFSR, the USSR, the Russian Federation :
1 Russo-Swedish War (1554-1557)- started by the Swedes, ended in victory
2 Livonian War (1558 - 1583)- started by the Russians to lift the trade blockade on the part of the Hanseatic League, Sweden, Lithuania and Poland (R.P.) stood up for Livonia in succession, the result was extremely unsuccessful (loss of almost the entire north-west and Belarusian lands)
3 Crimean campaign against Moscow(1571) - initiated by the Crimeans, the result was disastrous
4 Battle of Molodi (1572)- initiated by the Krymchaks as the last blow (see line above), decisive victory
added - Russo-Swedish War (1579-1583)- started by the Swedes as part of the Livonian War, military draw, territorial losses (Ivangorod, Koporye)
5 Russo-Swedish War (1590-1595)- started by the Russians, successful, minor acquisitions of territories in Karelia
6 Russian-Polish War (1605-1618)- attempts by the Poles to crush the Russian Kingdom during times of unrest, the main goal was not achieved, significant territorial losses (Smolensk, Chernigov, Seversk)
7 Russian-Swedish War (1614-1617)- started by the Swedes, military draw, territorial losses (Ingermland, Karela)
8 Smolensk War (1631-1634) - started by Russians against Poles for the return of Smolensk lands, a military and political draw
9 Russian-Polish War 1654-1667- started by the Russians for the return of western lands, successful, significant territorial acquisitions (Smolensk, left-bank Little Russia, Seversk, Kyiv)
10 Russian-Swedish war 1656-1658- started by the Swedes, simultaneously with the Russian-Polish conflict (see previous), military draw, minor territorial acquisitions (Marienburg, Dorpat)
11 Russian-Turkish War (1676-1681)- started by the Turks, who sought to crush the Right Bank, a military and political draw.
12 Russo-Turkish War (1686–1700)- started by the Russians within the framework of a pan-European military alliance against Turkey, carried out incl. for gaining access to the Black Sea, a military draw, territorial acquisitions that gave access to Azov
13 Northern War (1700-1721) - the war was started by the Russians for the return of the northwestern lands and access to the Baltic, military victory, significant territorial acquisitions (Izhora, Livonia, Estland, southern Finland)
14 Russian-Turkish War (1710-1713)- started by the Turks as part of the support of the Swedish side (see Northern War), military defeat, loss of the Azov territories
15 Persian campaign 1722-23- started by the Russians, military victory, territorial acquisitions in the Caspian region (not for long)
16 War of the Polish Succession 1733-1735- participation of Russian forces as part of the Russian-Austrian alliance in minor military operations against French troops in the territories of Poland and Silesia.
17 Russian-Turkish War 1735-1739- started by Russians, military and political draw
18 Russian-Swedish war 1741-1743- started by the Swedes, military victory, unknown territorial acquisitions
19 Seven Years' War 1756-1763- Russian participation in the war within the framework of a political anti-Prussian alliance
20 Russian-Turkish War 1768-1774- started by the Turks, a crushing victory, significant territorial acquisitions (southern Ukraine, Crimea, North Caucasus)
21 Bar Confederation 1768-1776- civil war of part of the Polish gentry against King Poniatowski and the pro-Russian party in Poland, Russian troops supported the Polish army in battles against the Confederates.
22 Russian-Turkish War 1787-1792- started by the Turks for the return of lands lost in the previous campaign, a crushing victory, territorial acquisitions in Transnistria.
23 Russian-Swedish war 1788-1790- started by the Swedes, military victory
24 Russian-Polish War 1792- started by the Russians, military victory, return of Western Russian lands (Pinsk, Polesie, Podolia, Volyn)
25 Kosciuszko Rebellion (1794) - Russian suppression troops of the civil uprising in Poland
26 Russo-Persian War 1796- started by the Russians in fulfillment of the obligations of the Treaty of Georgievsk, as a response to the military actions of the Persians in Transcaucasia, a military victory.
27 Italian campaign of Suvorov (1799)- an episode of Russia's participation in the Anglo-Austro-Turkish-Neapolitan-Russian alliance against revolutionary France.
28 Russian-Persian War 1804-1813- started by the Persians, in response to the expansion of Russian territory in Transcaucasia, military victory, territorial acquisitions (East Georgia, Imereti, Mengrelia, Abkhazia, Azerbaijan)
29 War of the Third Coalition (1805)- see below
30 War of the Fourth Coalition 1806–1807- see below
31 Russian-Turkish War 1806-1812- provoked by both sides by mutual violations of the treaty status of the Danube principalities, military victory, territorial acquisitions (Bessarabia, Transcaucasia)
32 Anglo-Russian War 1807-1812- a consequence of the defeat of Russia in the war of the fourth coalition, joining the continental blockade and declaring war on England, military actions are insignificant, a draw.
33 Russian-Swedish War 1808-1809- started by the Russians as part of the Anglo-Russian war against the British allies, military victory, annexation of Finland.
34 War of the Fifth Coalition (1809)- Russia’s participation and support for its European allies in a number of anti-Napoleonic wars in Europe (see coalition wars above)
35 Patriotic War of 1812- launched by the French, a united pan-European campaign against Russia under the command of Napoleon, victory.
36 Foreign campaign of the Russian army 1813-14.- response to the attack of Napoleon's troops, see above
37 Capture of Paris (1814)- logical conclusion see above and above
38 Russian-Persian War (1826-1828)- started by the Persians as revenge for previous losses, a military victory, terr. acquisitions (Armenia, Caspian coast)
39 Russian-Turkish War (1828-1829)- started by the Russians, episode of the wars for Greek independence, military victory, territorial acquisitions (Moldova, Danube Delta, Georgia, eastern Black Sea)
40 Polish uprising of 1830 - Russian suppression troops of the uprising of the troops of the Kingdom of Poland.
41 War of Russia against the Khanate of Khiva 1835 - 1840 - counter-terrorist operation of the Russian expeditionary force on the right bank of the Caspian Sea, in response to the predatory actions of the Khivans and Kyrgyz
42 Crimean War 1853-1856- started by the Turks, supported by England and France, military draw, loss of part of the Danube territories
43 Polish uprising of 1863 - suppression by Russian troops civil uprising in the territory Poland and Lithuania.
44 Russian war in Central Asia (Tashkent, Bukhara, Khiva) - 1865-1875- initial rationale - pacification of territories, from which attacks took place on the South Ural and Caspian lands of Russia, military victory, and the gradual annexation of Khiva, Kokand, Bukhara, and Turkestan to the Empire.
45 Russian-Turkish War 1877-1878- started by the Russians, in response to the cruelty of the Turks in the Balkans, military victory, return of Bessarabia
46 Yihetuan Uprising 1899-1901 - participation of Russian troops in suppressing the civil uprising, during which they suffered, incl. Russian settlers in China, which escalated into a full-scale war of the Anglo-Russian-Japanese-American coalition against China
47 Russo-Japanese War 1905- started by Japan, defeat, loss of South Sakhalin, Liaodong Peninsula, China.
48 First World War 1914-1918- started by Germany, defeat, catastrophic watering. and ter. losses
49 Russian Civil War (1917-1923)- no comments
added Intervention of foreign troops on Russian territory - 1918-1921- invasion of troops Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Poland, Japan, USA on the territory Sov. Russia during the civil war, their gradual squeezing out and evacuation as the Red Army strengthened.
50 Soviet-Polish War 1919-1921- started by Poland with the goal of returning the Kres lands, a military draw, establishing control over Eastern Ukraine and Eastern Belarus
51 World War II (1939-1945)- see below
52 Battles at Khalkhin Gol (1939)- started by the Japanese, the participation of Soviet troops on the side of Mongolia in a territorial dispute with Japan.
53 Soviet-Polish War of 1939- incorrect, more precisely - occupation of the East Poland by Soviet troops after the fall of the Polish Republic in the war with Germany and the flight of Polish rule abroad, military resistance as such from the Polish army in the absence of the last owls. the troops were not met.
54 Soviet-Finnish War (1939-1940)- started by the USSR, with the goal of pushing the border of a hostile state away from Leningrad (40 km before the war), victory, territorial acquisitions (Karelia, Southern Finland)
55 Great Patriotic War (1941-1945)- started by Germany, victory, protectorate over Eastern Europe
56 Soviet-Japanese War (1945)- started by the USSR in pursuance of the alliance treaty with the USA, victory, return of Sakhalin, acquisition of the Kuril island chain
57 Korean War (1950-1953)- unofficial participation of Soviet military advisers on the side of the army of communist Korea in the war against the United States.
58 Vietnam War (1957-1975)- unofficial participation of Soviet military advisers on the side of the communist Vietnamese army in the war against the United States.
59 Suppression of the 1956 Hungarian Uprising- b.k.
60 Suppression of the Prague Spring (1968)- b.k.
61 Arab-Israeli War (1967–1973)- USSR support for the Arab side with military equipment, and to a limited extent - with military specialists.
62 Angolan Civil War (1975-2002)- unofficial participation of owls. and Russian military advisers in order to fulfill their international fucking duty.
63 Ogaden War (1977-1978)- participation in the Ethiopian-Somali war mainly in the form of military-technical support for Ethiopia, as well as the limited presence of Soviet military advisers on the side of Ethiopia.
64 Afghan War (1979-1989)- started by the USSR with the goal of overthrowing the pro-American regime and, again, fulfilling internationally, his mother’s duty, the war was in vain and ended in political defeat.
65 First Chechen War (1994)- started by federal Russian troops for the establishment of constitutional order in the Chechen Republic, defeat, de facto loss of territory
66 Second Chechen War (1999)- started by federal Russian troops in response to the invasion of Chechen militants in Dagestan, victory, pacification of Chechnya and its preservation as a state. RF.
67 War in South Ossetia, Georgia (2008)- b.k., victory, political control over Abkhazia and South Ossetia
Of course, the list is far from complete. The participation of the Cossacks in the expansion of the Empire’s possessions to the Urals, Southern Siberia, the Amur region, the Far East, Kamchatka, as well as the conquest of Chukotka was not noted.
I I. The following list of wars and/or hostilities is organized according to geographical and temporal criteria
LIST OF STATES, CITIES, TERRITORIES AND PERIODS OF COMBAT OPERATIONS WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF CITIZENS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
1. Great Patriotic War: from June 22, 1941 to May 9 (11), 1945.
2. Combat operations conducted entirely or mainly on the territory of the USSR (1918-1991) and the Russian Federation (1991-2008).
- Civil War: from February 23, 1918 to October 1922.
- Combat operations to eliminate the Basmachi: from October 1922 to June 1931.
- Combat operations in the Chechen Republic and in the adjacent territories of the Russian Federation classified as a zone of armed conflict: from December 1994 to December 1996.
- Combat operations during counter-terrorism operations in the North Caucasus region: since August 1999.
3. Combat operations conducted entirely or mainly outside the territory of the USSR (1918-1991) and the Russian Federation (1991-2008).
Fighting against Poland:
- Soviet-Polish war: March - October 1920;
- during the reunification of the USSR, Western Ukraine and Western Belarus: from September 17 to 28, 1939.
Fighting in Spain : 1936 - 1939.
War with Finland : from November 30, 1939 to March 13, 1940.
Fighting against Japan:
- combat operations in the area of Lake Khasan: from July 29 to August 11, 1938;
- combat operations on the Khalkhin Gol River: from May 11 to September 16, 1939;
- war with Japan: from August 9, 1945 to September 3, 1945.
Fighting in and against China:
- from August 1924 to July 1927;
- October - November 1929;
- from July 1937 to September 1944;
- July - September 1945;
- from March 1946 to April 1949;
- March - May 1950 (for personnel of the air defense force group);
- from June 1950 to July 1953 (for personnel of military units that took part in hostilities in North Korea from Chinese territory);
- in the area of Damansky Island: March 1969.
- area of Lake Zhalanashkol: August 1969.
Fighting in Hungary: 1956.
Fighting in Laos:
- from January 1960 to December 1963;
- from August 1964 to November 1968;
- from November 1969 to December 1970.
Combat in Vietnam: January 1961 to December 1974 , including for the personnel of reconnaissance ships of the Pacific Fleet, performing combat service tasks in the South China Sea.
Fighting in Algeria: 1962 - 1964.
Fighting in Egypt (United Arab Republic):
- June 1967;
- 1968;
- from March 1969 to July 1972;
- from October 1973 to March 1974;
- from June 1974 to February 1975 (for personnel of minesweepers of the Black Sea and Pacific fleets who participated in demining the Suez Canal zone)
Fighting in the Yemen Arab Republic:
- from October 1962 to March 1963;
- from November 1967 to December 1969.
Fighting in Syria:
- June 1967;
- March - July 1970;
- September - November 1972;
- October 1973.
Fighting in Mozambique:
- 1967 - 1969;
- from November 1975 to November 1979;
- from March 1984 to August 1988.
Fighting in Cambodia: April - December 1970.
Fighting in Bangladesh: 1972 - 1973 (for personnel of ships and auxiliary vessels of the USSR Navy).
Fighting in Angola: from November 1975 to November 1992.
Fighting in Ethiopia:
- from December 1977 to November 1990;
- from May 2000 to December 2000.
Combat in Afghanistan: from April 1978 to February 15, 1989.
Fighting in Syria and Lebanon: June 1982.
Fighting in the Republic of Tajikistan:
- September - November 1992;
- from February 1993 to December 1997.
Fighting in Georgia: from 8 to 22 August 2008 (performing tasks to ensure the safety and protection of citizens of the Russian Federation living in the territories of the Republic of South Ossetia and the Republic of Abkhazia).
Sources, p. I. →
Many Americans living in North Carolina still remember January 24, 1961 with a shudder. This day could go down in the history of the United States and all of humanity as one of the greatest disasters of the 20th century. And it was like that. A B-52 strategic bomber, alerted from Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base, carrying two 24-megaton nuclear bombs, crashed 15 miles north of the city of Goldsboro. Experts from the Ministry of Defense who arrived in the area of the accident were amazed. Of the six safety mechanisms that are sequentially activated to cause a chain reaction in the deadly charge, five (!) were activated when the aircraft exploded. Only a miracle saved the residents of the state from the horror of Hiroshima.
The normal life of the population in the area of the Italian town of Seveso, north of Milan, was disrupted for many years. On June 10, 1976, an explosion occurred at a chemical plant owned by a multinational corporation. About two kilograms of a chemical substance, a defoliant, similar in composition to those used by the American military in South Vietnam, were released into the atmosphere. According to experts, the chemical substance in the air was enough to cause the death of one hundred thousand people. But the residents of the Italian province are “lucky”! The defoliant dissipated in the atmosphere... However, even at the same time, dozens of people were injured, including especially many children. They were taken to the hospital with facial burns, eczema, and ulcers. Hundreds of dogs, cats, rabbits, chickens, swallows, and many other animals and birds died. The area of the accident was cordoned off by troops. The population was evacuated.
So, case after case... But there are now many areas on Earth where the preconditions for environmental disasters of various scales are ripening! And these conditions are created step by step by humanity itself, or rather, by those of its representatives who have made the main motive of their activities profit and interference in the affairs of other countries and peoples in order to ensure this profit.
It is well known that one of the main instruments of imperialism’s policy was and remains weapons. It is also common knowledge that its power is growing. And although it is already clear that deciding to use modern weapons in a political confrontation is tantamount to madness, imperialism continues the arms race. And to justify this process, a theory even arose in the West that it was the destructive power of modern weapons, and the fear of it, that was holding back the outbreak of war. This power itself, its increase, turns out to be a guarantee of peace on Earth... The absurdity of such a theory has long been proven. But the possibility that the very buildup of weapons, the arms race itself, is fraught with environmental disasters deserves close consideration.
The two cases that we have described already make it possible to see the danger to which the biosphere of the planet is exposed even in peace conditions due to the fault of military-industrial complexes. The danger that arises at various stages of the development and production of new types of weapons, as well as during their testing, transportation and storage...
What does “ecological war” look like?
The last decade has added another “innovation” to the sad experience of wars. In front of me are photographs of some areas of South Vietnam taken at the very beginning of the 70s. The surface of the earth is dotted with craters and resembles a lunar landscape, vegetation has been destroyed over large areas... It seems that a severe natural disaster has occurred on the Indochinese Peninsula. However, this impression is wrong.
In the period 1965-1973 alone, 17 million air bombs were dropped on the territory of South Vietnam, and 217 million artillery shells were exploded here. According to the calculations of the American scientist A. Westing, the total weight of explosives that were used for shelling, disturbing vegetation, and damaging irrigation systems was over 7 million tons. However, these figures and facts do not exhaust the picture of the overall damage to nature, nor do they provide a complete description of the arsenal of means used to influence the environment.
The area, riddled with bomb craters and rendered unsuitable for economic use, amounted to 365,700 acres. At least 4 million acres, or about one tenth of the entire territory of South Vietnam, were subjected to repeated “treatment” with defoliants - weapons that destroy vegetation. The tactical goal of the operation was announced - to remove forest cover to make it more difficult for the partisans to hide and move. But the facts show that behind this declared task there was also a certain super task - to try to upset the balance of the natural environment, and to develop methods and means of “ecological warfare”.
Here is a far from complete list of means and methods of using environmental weapons: the use of chemicals to destroy tree foliage and vegetation; the use of aerial bombs in the jungle; the use of “bundles” of 33-ton bulldozers to remove the surface layer, after which the soil becomes unsuitable for farming (the so-called “Roman plow”); artificial cloud formation and induction of rain by “seeding” clouds with chemicals; acidification of the atmosphere by spraying substances into it that cause rain with an acid reaction; firestorms - spraying of chemicals that cause large fires in the jungle; destruction of dams and irrigation structures. Thus, a deliberate war was waged against the nature of another country, and there was a genuine destruction of the habitat of current and future generations of an entire people.
It should be recalled that deforestation alone on Polish territory by fascist troops during the Second World War was qualified by the Nuremberg Tribunal as a war crime. It is worth remembering something else. In the early 1950s, British colonial troops used chemicals to destroy crops in Malaya; Portuguese colonialists used the same techniques in Angola; There are known cases of impact on the natural environment during military campaigns in the Middle East. Former Pentagon employee L. Pont recently reported that in 1969-1970 the United States attempted to influence the clouds moving towards Cuba in order to deprive the sugar cane plantations on Liberty Island of the necessary amount of moisture, cause drought and thereby cause damage to the neighboring economic damage to the state.
It doesn’t hurt to note the circumstances that make the situation more confusing and more dangerous. In Vietnam there was a deliberate destruction of nature. But pesticides are known to dissipate! And, used in Vietnam, they then entered the atmosphere and went with the flowing waters into the World Ocean. Where and how will this echo? Unknown. But it is quite possible that the long-term consequences of this local “ecological war” will be quite noticeable for other nations, perhaps even for the American one.
And one more circumstance. At the end of 1975, the Norwegian government made a strong protest to the countries of the Common Market in connection with the ongoing poisoning of the air over Norwegian territory by the products of industrial activity of the countries of the Common Market, primarily England. Smoke and gases carried across the North Sea have already caused significant damage to the forestry and fisheries of southern Norway, and they also threaten public health.
A new type of aggression, which apparently cannot be called aggression... Of course, the neighboring countries did not intend to destroy the nature of their NATO ally. But doesn’t this open up, tempting for the military, the possibility of disguised influence on the natural environment of other countries? The mentioned experience of “geophysical aggression” against Cuba speaks of the reality of such an option. Further improvement of military science could increase this danger.
On the brink of disaster
The American atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a destructive power equivalent to 20 thousand tons of conventional explosive (TNT). Its explosion killed 78 thousand people, and another 84 thousand civilians were injured. Experts at the Center for Defense Information estimate the capacity of the US nuclear potential as of mid-1975 at 8 thousand megatons. This is 400,000 times more than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
There is a saying about a gun that fires itself once a year. And the danger of such a spontaneous “shot” grows with the accumulation of weapons.
Back in 1956, a B-36 bomber taking off from Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico, unexpectedly dropped an atomic bomb on a plain near the launch site. It turned out okay, the bomb didn't explode...
On January 17, 1966, American B-52 and K-135 aircraft collided while refueling in the air near Palomares in Spain. The B-52 bomber had four hydrogen bombs on board. Two of them, when they fell, caused radioactive contamination in an area with a large population.
In January 1968, a strategic bomber accident occurred near Thule, Greenland, resulting in the loss of four hydrogen bombs.
When President Kennedy ordered an investigation into the circumstances of the next disaster, he was informed that more than sixty “accidents” involving atomic weapons had already been recorded, including two accidental launches of missiles with nuclear charges.
On April 21, 1964, an artificial Earth satellite was launched at Vandernberg Air Base under the Transit project, which is operated by the US Navy. On board the satellite, in addition to instruments and equipment, there was a radioisotope power plant SNEP-9a, operating on plutonium-238. The launch was unsuccessful: the satellite did not enter orbit and burned up in the dense layers of the atmosphere. As a result, a cloud of tiny particles of radioactive material formed at a high altitude. There is a threat of infection in several areas of Africa. Although the goal of the Transit project is not the creation of space weapons, but only to ensure the navigation of ships, the consequences of this accident resulted in the danger of real damage to the population and the natural environment.
Alas, that's not all.
"Time Bombs"
“A radioactive time bomb has been planted under Ireland,” wrote the Irish Independent newspaper, characterizing the situation developing in the North Atlantic, some hundreds of kilometers from the country’s coast. The fact is that for a number of years, member states of the European Atomic Energy Agency have been using this water area for a “nuclear dump”. In 1976 alone, over 6 thousand tons of deadly radioactive waste were dropped from ships in England, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland. In words, these states take precautionary measures: they say that radioactive waste is stored in special containers. However, as another Irish newspaper, the Irish Times, emphasizes, the service life of containers does not exceed ten years. And the natural neutralization of radioactive substances requires a longer time. This means that a “nuclear dump” off the coast of Ireland could over time become a source of radioactive contamination of the marine environment, cause irreparable damage to flora and fauna, and affect the economy of a number of states.
Let us note in passing that over the entire history of the use of atomic energy in the United States, bomb production has produced 700 times more radioactive waste than all nuclear power plants.
But the “radioactive mine” is far from the only one.
An epidemic of an unknown disease that broke out in the American state of Pennsylvania claimed several dozen lives. It had to happen that the victims of this epidemic were participants in the traditional convention of the ultra-right organization “American Legion”, held at the end of 1975 in Philadelphia. American journalists dubbed the mysterious disease “legionary fever.” Comparing the available data, doctors are inclined to believe that its most likely cause was Lassa fever microbes, which, in all likelihood, “escaped” from a laboratory for the production of bacteriological weapons at Fort Detrick, located in the neighboring state of Maryland.
More than a thousand sheep died in one night in January 1971 on a ranch 150 miles southeast of the American town of Skull Valley. The area was already the site of a tragedy in 1968, when a nerve gas leak from a secret Pentagon test site killed 6,400 sheep. Although the military has since stopped testing potent gases in the area, lethal levels of these substances are still contained in the vegetation. This is what caused the second case of animal death.
An equally dangerous episode occurred in December 1970 at a test site in Nevada, where the US military is conducting underground tests of nuclear weapons. Suddenly, a radioactive cloud shot up over one of the sections of the test site. Under the influence of the wind, it began to move north. Measures were taken - 600 people were evacuated. However, radioactivity was subsequently discovered in Minnesota and twenty other American states. As the director of the Southwestern Radiological Laboratory, Melville Carter, was forced to admit, if radioactive dust crossed the border into Canada, the United States would be in violation of the Moscow Treaty banning nuclear tests in three environments.
The outcry was sparked by reports of Defense Department operations to scuttle nerve gas containers 250 miles off the Florida coast. In the same way, they tried to “get rid” of 13 thousand tons of toxic substances that had been accumulated at a military base located on the Japanese island of Okinawa. They were supposed to be delivered to Johnston Atoll, 700 miles from Honolulu. Not to mention the fact that such burials pose a threat to the flora and fauna of the World Ocean, which is the property of all mankind, the very transportation of such goods by rail, loading them onto ships in seaports is fraught with mortal danger for the population, wildlife and vegetation of the state where toxic substances.
Another “time bomb” was discovered in Alaska in January 1971. As it turned out, two hundred cylinders with a powerful nerve gas were dumped in the winter of 1966 on the ice of a small lake. Due to the criminal negligence of the US military authorities, the deadly cylinders were forgotten, and in May, when the snow melted, they ended up at the bottom. There was no order to destroy the gas, since it was listed as “lost.” And just one drop of the contents of the cylinders was enough to cause the death of a person. Nevertheless, representatives of the military department did not even take the trouble to notify the residents of the northern regions of Alaska about the threat looming over them...
There is no other way
Geneva. Palace of Nations. May 18, 1977. Representatives of 33 states put their signatures on the convention prohibiting military or any other hostile use of means of influencing the natural environment. The Convention outlaws means and methods of destructive influence on weather and climate, the use of technical methods of creating earthquakes and tsunamis, and influencing atmospheric processes, soil, and vegetation over vast areas.
The significance of the convention, which opened a new direction in the field of disarmament, lies precisely in the fact that it is a real step towards preventing intentional damage to the biosphere. Now the conclusion seems completely obvious that the preservation of the natural environment, suitable for the normal life and work of living and future generations, largely depends on how successfully the broad and comprehensive process of arms limitation and disarmament develops.
Now the protection and enhancement of natural resources for the benefit of current and future generations of the Soviet people are proclaimed by the draft Constitution of our country among the most important tasks and responsibilities of a citizen of the USSR. But we share our only planet with other peoples and states. Therefore, we are far from indifferent not only to the problems of the world, but also to the attitude towards the nature of other states. International cooperation on the principles of equality and mutual benefit, respect for the environment, limiting all forms of damage that militarism causes to it is the urgent task of today. Nature is one, irreplaceable, and even covered gun muzzles are more and more dangerous for it.
G. Khozin, Candidate of Historical Sciences
June 22: There was no “suddenness”! [How Stalin missed the blow] Melekhov Andrey M.
How the “undeclared” war was declared
During my life, I have read many books on the topic of Nazi Germany’s attack on the USSR, published at different times and in different countries. Surprisingly, the Memorandum Note of the German government on the declaration of war on the Soviet Union came to my attention only in 2009 - when I read a work remarkable for the factual material selected R.S. Irinarkhova- “Kyiv special.” And this is strange: it would seem that every historian seriously studying this issue should pay attention to at least a brief analysis of this most important document. In the end, the Nuremberg Tribunal sent the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Nazi Germany, Ribbentrop, to the gallows including for the fact that he allegedly did not prepare this Note and allegedly did not declare war. At least during the trial, representatives of the USSR categorically denied the following easily verifiable facts:
1) the document was handed over to Molotov almost simultaneously with the outbreak of hostilities on the morning of June 22, 1941 by the German Ambassador to the Soviet Union, Count Schulenburg; 2) at about the same time, Ribbentrop handed the same document to the Soviet ambassador Dekanozov in Berlin.
In any case, anyone who undertakes to criticize the works of Rezun-Suvorov should begin by studying the Notes. The full document is called “Note from the German Foreign Office to the Soviet Government dated June 21, 1941”. Unfortunately, the text is given by R. Irinarkhov without three appendices. I will list them:
1) “Report of the German Minister of the Interior, the Reichsführer SS and the Chief of the German Police to the German government on the sabotage work of the USSR directed against Germany and National Socialism”;
2) “Report of the German Foreign Ministry on propaganda and political agitation of the Soviet government”;
3) “Report of the High Command of the German Army to the German Government on the concentration of Soviet troops against Germany.”
I note, however, that one of these documents - the report of the chief of the SD security police, Heydrich, dated June 10, 1941 - I subsequently discovered as an appendix to the “Memoirs” Walter Schellenberg.
In the Soviet Union, the existence of the Note was not recognized for a long time - despite the fact that Molotov, in his radio speech on June 22, 1941, published in Soviet newspapers, said the following: “The German government decided to go to war against the USSR in connection with the concentration of Red Army units near eastern German border." It is curious that the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union did not refute the fact of the concentration of Soviet troops at that time - apparently, like his comrades, he was in a state of shock. But the shock passed, and almost the next day in the USSR they “forgot” about this most important document for decades - until the collapse of the Soviet Union. So, "Short story. Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union 1941-1945", prepared by the “Ministry of Truth” - the Institute of Marxism-Leninism under the CPSU Central Committee in 1965, voiced the then version of events as follows: “The Soviet people will never forget those alarming minutes of Sunday morning on June 22, 1941, when Moscow radio interrupted its broadcasts and all heard a government message: in the middle of the night without announcement war fascist hordes suddenly invaded the borders of our country” (p. 57). But time passed, and truthful information regarding the true picture of events gradually spread throughout the world. Which was not surprising: on June 23, 1941, the text of the Note was published by most of the leading newspapers in the world (including the previously mentioned New York Times). It became increasingly difficult to openly ignore the facts appearing in Western historiography, and the Institute of Marxism-Leninism had to compose a more “advanced” version. To do this, the “Ministry of Truth” had to call for help from the Institute of Military History of the USSR Ministry of Defense, the Institute of General History of the USSR Academy of Sciences, and the Institute of USSR History of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Together they composed a new official "History of the Second World War." The 4th volume of “History...”, published ten years after the “short course” - in 1975 - already mentions “... statement transmitted to the Soviet government by the German Ambassador F. Schulenburg an hour and a half after the invasion of German troops.” The statement was precisely an official declaration of war, in which, according to “History...”, “Nazi leaders claimed that they were forced to take the path of preventive war against the USSR, since it allegedly did not fulfill its obligations under the Soviet-German treaty and was preparing to attack Germany, to strike from the rear.” Recognizing the fact of the official declaration of war, G.K. also refers to the Note. Zhukov. Nevertheless, in “History...” the stamp “suddenly, without a declaration of war...” is used literally on the same pages where it talks about the “declaration” (vol. 4, pp. 30-31). In general, I read this document with great attention.
Here is its beginning: “When the Reich government, based on the desire to achieve a balance of interests of Germany and the USSR, turned to the Soviet government in the summer of 1939, it was aware that mutual understanding with the state, which, on the one hand, represents its belonging to community of national states with all the ensuing rights and obligations, and on the other hand, being led by a party which, as a section of the COMINTERN ( hereinafter capital letters are used in the original text. – Approx. author) seeks to spread the revolution on a global scale, that is, to destroy these nation-states, is unlikely to be an easy task.” In my opinion, already this first paragraph very clearly and correctly captures the insurmountable ideological gap between Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union. Despite the many parallels and commonalities, both dictators strove for models of world domination that were fundamentally different from each other: National Socialism was in many ways the opposite of Marxist-Leninist socialism. Both ideologies, however, turned out to be almost identical in terms of their attitude towards democracy and the effectiveness of exterminating both the declared enemies - class and racial, and those whose interests they were seemingly designed to protect - ordinary workers and peasants.
The Note further states that an attempt to find a common language between “long considered friendly peoples” and “to protect against the further spread of communist doctrines of international Jewry in Europe” was made: on August 23, 1939, the Non-Aggression Pact was signed, and on September 28, and the Treaty of Friendship and Borders between both states.
After reading the next paragraph, it immediately becomes clear why Soviet historians avoided making the Note public: it talks about the essence of the above treaties, the first of which, signed on August 23, 1939, is usually referred to as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. It is interesting that the Germans call this and the subsequent agreement, signed on September 28, 1939, the “Moscow Treaties” - after the place where negotiations were held and the relevant documents were signed.
“The essence of these agreements,” says the Note, “was as follows:
1) in the mutual obligation of states not to attack each other and to maintain good neighborly relations;
2) in delimiting spheres of interests by refusing the German Reich any influence in Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Bessarabia, while the territory of the former Polish state up to the Narev-Bug-San line, at the request of Soviet Russia, remained with it.”
Nota emphasizes that the Reich government “pacified Poland, which means, at the cost of German blood, it contributed to the Soviet Union achieving the greatest foreign policy success during its existence. This became possible only thanks to Germany’s benevolent policy towards Russia and the brilliant victories of the Wehrmacht.” Thus, Hitler admits that he pulled chestnuts out of the fire for Stalin, but did it without any enthusiasm: after all, at the same time, he pushed Germany into a war with half the world, and therefore did not forget about the “German blood” shed for Soviet interests... Along the way, I’ll allow myself express distrust to those historians who still claim that if the USSR had not stabbed Poland in the back, Hitler would have seized Western Ukraine and Belarus and would not have given them to Stalin. This is quite easy to do. I suggest, for example, taking a look at the collection “The Eve and Beginning of War” published in the Soviet Union (compiled by L.A. Kirshner). Us. 158 of the mentioned publication contains the text of Ribbentrop’s urgent telegram to the German ambassador in Moscow dated September 3, 1939. It literally says the following: “We certainly hope to completely defeat the Polish army within a few weeks. Then we will keep under military occupation the areas that, as agreed in Moscow, are included in the German sphere of influence. However, it is clear that for military reasons we will then have to act against those Polish military forces that by that time will be located in the territories within the Russian sphere of influence. Please discuss this with Molotov immediately and see if the Soviet Union would not consider it desirable for the Russian army to move at the appropriate moment against the Polish forces in the Russian sphere of influence and, for its part, occupy that territory. According to our considerations, this would not only help us, but also, in accordance with the Moscow agreements, would be in Soviet interests ... "
The German leadership, which Great Britain and France declared war on on September 3, 1939, suddenly felt very uncomfortable. And it was quite reasonable to turn to the new Soviet partners so that they would quickly grab their share of the Polish state. This would automatically make waging war with Germany even less tempting for the Allies than it seemed to their governments on the morning of September 3, when Hitler was given the appropriate ultimatums to withdraw German troops from Polish territory. The text of Ribbentrop's telegram meant the following: the Germans literally begged the USSR to quickly fulfill its “international duty” and join a pre-agreed bandit attack on their common neighbor. The panicked Nazis, not without reason, hoped that the West would then declare war on the Soviet Union, which would thus end up in the same boat with Nazi Germany and become its ally in the new World War, as they say, “by definition.” But it was not there!
Here is the text of Ambassador Schulenburg’s response telegram dated September 5, 1939 (as we see, the Soviet comrades were in no hurry to respond to German calls): “Molotov... conveyed to me the following response from the Soviet government: “We agree with you that at the right time we will absolutely need start concrete actions. We believe, however, that this time has not yet come. We may be mistaken, but it seems to us that excessive haste can cause us harm and contribute to the unification of our enemies...” (ibid., p. 159). A very revealing document! Just like in the joke about the old and young bulls standing on the hill! Stalin, not without irony, makes it clear to the Germans “ parteigenossen", which perfectly understands their fears, but somehow he himself will choose the best moment to stab the Poles in the back. The time to present the corresponding Note of the Soviet Government to the Polish Ambassador in Moscow came only on September 17 - when (in the words of this Soviet Note) “the internal insolvency of the Polish state was revealed”, “Warsaw ceased to be the capital of Poland”, “The Polish state and its government actually ceased to exist” and “thereby the agreements concluded between the USSR and Poland ceased to apply” (ibid.).
It should be noted that the distrustful Stalin still had doubts that the new partners would adhere to the recently reached agreements and withdraw troops from the already captured territories to the demarcation line stipulated by the protocols of the Pact. W. Shirer quotes the corresponding telegram from Ambassador Schellenburg dated September 18, where he described the essence of the last conversation with the Soviet dictator on the eve of the Red Army's invasion of Poland: “In view of Stalin's inherent suspicion, I would be grateful if I were authorized to give further assurances of a similar nature in order eliminate his last doubts” (“The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”, p. 645). The next day, Ribbentrop telegraphed: “...The agreements that I signed in Moscow will, of course, be respected... They are considered by us as a solid basis for new friendly relations between Germany and the USSR” (ibid.).
Here's an interesting fact: Alexander Pronin in his article “Soviet-Polish events”, referring to p. 99 books by M.I. Semiryagi “Soviet-German agreements”: “The German side sought joint actions with the Red Army troops from the very beginning of the military campaign planned by Hitler. In this regard, M.I. Semiryaga provides the following information. At the end of August 1939, information leaked to the Western press that, due to worsening German-Polish relations, it was planned to withdraw troops of 200-300 thousand people from the western Soviet borders. This message caused concern in Berlin, and on August 27, a telegram was urgently sent to Schulenburg, in which he was instructed to find out whether “Soviet troops are really being withdrawn from the Polish border. Is it possible to return them so that they tie up Polish forces in the east as much as possible?" Schulenburg, having received the relevant information from the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, said: a statement would soon be published stating that Soviet troops were not going to withdraw from the border with Poland. Indeed, on August 30, 1939, the Soviet government officially declared: “In view of the aggravation of the situation in the eastern regions of Europe and in view of the possibility of any surprises ( “surprise” is Stalin’s favorite euphemism for the coming “liberation” of neighbors. – Approx. author), the Soviet command decided to strengthen the size of the garrisons on the western borders of the USSR" (collection "Supernova Truth of Viktor Suvorov", p. 73). Another example of quite constructive cooperation between two cannibalistic regimes: on September 17, Stalin spoke out against the German version of a joint communiqué designed to justify the Soviet-German destruction of Poland, since it stated the facts “too frankly.” “Then,” writes W. Shirer, “he composed his own version - an example of sophistication - and forced the Germans to agree with him. It stated that the common goal of Germany and Russia was “to restore peace and order in Poland, which had been undermined by the collapse of the Polish state, and to assist the Polish people in establishing new conditions for their political life” (“The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” p. 645).
I will not dwell on the discussion of the completely absurd argument of the Stalinists, who are still trying to justify the shameful outrage against Poland: they say, if the USSR had not signed the Pact, Hitler would have reached the Urals. Complete nonsense: he wouldn’t “go” anywhere. And even if he “went”, he would not “go far” - he had neither the strength, nor the desire, nor the fuel and ammunition. I think that the supporters of the legend about the “peacefulness” of the USSR themselves also understand this very well: they simply habitually lie in the hope that the persistent repetition of a deliberate lie will at least cast doubt on the truth.
One way or another, the prize for the cynically elegant two-week delay in the Red Army’s invasion of Poland (“this is the ugly brainchild of the Treaty of Versailles” - in the words of Molotov’s report at the meeting of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on October 31, 1939) was allied relations with the West. Had Stalin attacked fourteen days earlier, it is unknown how it would have ended for the fate of the world and Europe. For those in doubt, I ask you to remember the ostracism to which the USSR was subjected after the attack on Finland some two and a half months after that: expulsion from the League of Nations, economic sanctions (which led, among other things, to the freezing of Soviet assets in US banks and a ban on the supply of American equipment in the USSR), plans for bombing strikes by the British on Baku and the Soviet Air Force on Cairo and Baghdad. But let's get back to our main topic...
Now the authors of the Note move on to listing the claims of the German Reich to the USSR. First, it talks about grievances, rather strange for a diplomatic document, about maintaining ties with England and the escaped Yugoslav “conspirators.” The grievances, however, are completely justified: not even a year had passed since the signing of the Pact, and the new ally of Nazi Germany was already communicating quite cordially with representatives of its most dangerous enemy. Here is what “History of the Second World War” reports on this matter: “ July 1(1940) Ambassador Cripps ( British Ambassador) was accepted by I.V. Stalin. During the meeting, questions were discussed about the military situation in Europe, about political and economic relations between England and the USSR. The Soviet government showed its readiness to promote the normalization of relations with England"(vol. 3, p. 351). I note that this intimate communication took place almost immediately after the Soviet Union “liberated” the Baltic states with Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, but before that how Hitler gave his generals the order to prepare a plan for war with the USSR - this happened July 22, 1940. In other words, despite the fact that Stalin’s “marriage” with Hitler took place openly “of convenience” (they were depicted in such caricatures in the Western press - the “groom”-Hitler leading the mustachioed “bride”-Stalin down the aisle), it was Joseph Vissarionovich who was the first gave reason to the “royal brother” Adolf to suspect him of infidelity.
1) subversive work of Soviet/Comintern agents in Germany and on the territory of its satellites (like Romania and Bulgaria), as well as in countries captured by the Germans (Poland, Czechoslovakia);
2) espionage and sabotage activities.
With subversive work and espionage, everything is clear: the world has long known about the goals and specific activities of the Comintern - an international terrorist organization quite comparable to today's Al-Qaeda. Readers probably remember the pre-war warnings sent to Moscow by numerous agents of the Soviet secret services. Soviet spies worked quite effectively both in Germany and in other European countries during the war. But with regard to the sabotage activities mentioned by Note, I, frankly speaking, at first did not believe the fascist document: such steps seemed to me too adventurous and provocative.
And then the previously mentioned book by Pavel Sudoplatov “Special Operations” fell into my hands. Lubyanka and the Kremlin. 1930-1950." From it it suddenly became clear that Hitler and Ribbentrop were absolutely right on the issue of Soviet saboteurs! It was Sudoplatov (who in the spring of 1938 personally eliminated one of the leaders of the Ukrainian nationalist underground, E. Konovalets, in Antwerp) who was responsible before the war for the training and activities of Soviet illegal saboteurs on several continents. I will give several quotes from the former lieutenant general and head of the Special Group of the Foreign Department of the NKVD, which shed light on the secret operations of the Soviet special services.
“...Going to a meeting with Konovalets, I checked the work of the network of our illegal immigrants in Norway, whose task was to prepare sabotage on German and Japanese ships based in Europe and used to supply weapons and raw materials to the Franco regime in Spain. This network was headed by Ernst Wollweber, known to me at that time under the code name “Anton”. In particular, he led a group of Poles who had experience working in mines with explosives. These people had previously emigrated to France and Belgium, where we brought them into cooperation in case of war... I heard a report on the operation on the Polish cargo ship Stefan Batory, which was en route to Spain with a batch of strategic materials for Franco. It never reached its destination, sank in the North Sea after a fire broke out in its hold as a result of the explosion of a bomb planted by our people” (p. 41). Amazing confession! On the one hand, the USSR did not officially participate in the Spanish Civil War: it did not pose the slightest threat to it. On the other hand, Stalin not only sent mountains of weapons and hundreds of “volunteers” to Spain. It turns out that his special services blew up sea vessels of Germany, Japan and Poland - even those that were carrying non-military cargo! And the Soviet security officers and military intelligence officers were helped to carry out these adventurous operations by the most real Germans and Poles, recruited “for an idea” or just for a wad of money... “Wollweber,” recalls Sudoplatov, “made a strong impression on me... Later he was arrested Swedish authorities, and the Gestapo immediately demanded his extradition (Of course! – Author’s note.). However, he received Soviet citizenship (!) , so his deportation from Sweden to German-occupied Norway did not take place. After the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, in 1939, he came to Moscow and received orders to continue preparing sabotage in inevitable(!) war with Hitler. Wollweber's organization played an important role in the Norwegian Resistance" (ibid.). Let us note that the founder and long-term head of the BND (German foreign intelligence service), General R. Gehlen in his memoirs, he stated that during the same period—the so-called “honeymoon” in relations between the USSR and Nazi Germany—Hitler “completely prohibited espionage activities in the Soviet Union” (“The Service,” p. 35). As you might guess, the Gestapo had good reasons to demand the extradition of Wollweber: apparently, the Polish Stefan Batory was not the only civilian ship that was sunk by Soviet internationalist saboteurs long before the start of the Great Patriotic War. There were many such “Wollwebers” at the disposal of the relevant Soviet “authorities.” “At that time,” Sudoplatov describes the situation, “the number of such illegal immigrants was about sixty people” (ibid., p. 93). And this is only through the NKVD...
To my surprise, not only his former boss P. Sudoplatov wrote about Ernst Wollweber. The scale of the sabotage activities of his group turned out to be so significant that a lot of space was devoted to it in the already mentioned report of the Chief of the Security Police and SD Heydrich dated June 10, 1941 - the same appendix to the Note of the German government that I discovered in the “Memoirs” of Walter Schellenberg. Here is a selection of quotes from the said report: “...Having emigrated to Copenhagen, Wollweber headed the leadership of the ISH in 1933 ( International of Seafarers and Port Workers. – Approx. translation), which, being a professional organization of sailors and port workers, carries out acts of sabotage on behalf of the Comintern, mainly against the German merchant fleet. He bears primary responsibility for the organization and activities of sabotage groups created at the direction of Moscow in Germany, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, France and the Baltic states... After the entry of German troops into Oslo in May 1940, Wollweber fled to Sweden, where he is still imprisoned in Stockholm. The Soviet government turned to the Swedish government with a request to allow Wollweber to travel to the Soviet Union, giving him Soviet citizenship for successful work in the interests of the Comintern. As a result of the activities of these terrorist groups, widespread throughout Europe, sabotage was committed against 16 German, 3 Italian, 2 Japanese ships, two of which were completely destroyed” (“Memoirs”, p. 448). Personally, I did not find any contradictions between what the SD executioners wrote about Comrade Ernst’s violent sabotage activities in 1941 and his former boss P. Sudoplatov almost half a century after the end of World War II. Wasn't everything in the German Note a lie?.. What did the German anti-fascist do later? Here’s what: “Wollweber and his people,” Sudoplatov suggests, “who returned to Moscow in 1941-1944, helped us in recruiting German prisoners of war for our intelligence operations after the start of the war. After the end of the war, Wollweber headed the Ministry of State Security of the GDR for some time” (“Special Operations...”, p. 42). It is interesting to note that he was fired from this high position because he began, according to his old habit, to knock the Moscow “center” on his own “ parteigenossen". This outraged Khrushchev so much (who, by the way, was not himself a model of human virtues) that the Soviet Secretary General “surrendered” the outstanding internationalist to his boss Ulbricht. “He,” Sudoplatov sadly reports about the fate of the personal pensioner and former saboteur-provocateur, “died while in disgrace in the 60s.” The kingdom of heaven to him, the “poor fellow”!
The already mentioned former Nazi colonel and later West German general Reinhard Gehlen also gave Wollweber a lot of “kind” words in his memoirs. The fact is that “Comrade Ernst,” heading the East German intelligence service, caused Gehlen a lot of trouble not only by capturing many of the latter’s agents in the GDR and recruiting his own spies at the headquarters of Gehlen’s organization. In addition, the former Soviet subversive saboteur and provocateur waged a very active and completely unprincipled information war against the heirs of the Eastern Armies Department and the Abwehr in their own country, diligently inciting left-wing politicians and the German press against them. He even tried to set Germany at odds with France and the rest of Western Europe, claiming (not without reason) that Gehlen was conducting active espionage activities not only against the countries of the communist bloc, but also under the noses of his new allies. Therefore, Gehlen received the news that his main opponent was removed from office and retired with undisguised satisfaction (“The Service,” p. 232).
And here is another episode from the European adventures of Soviet security officers - colleagues and subordinates of P. Sudoplatov: “I deeply respected Slutsky as an experienced intelligence leader,” writes Lieutenant General of the NKVD about one of the best Soviet intelligence officers, “... it was he who at one time managed to kidnap in Sweden the technical secret of ball bearing production. This was of utmost importance for our industry. Slutsky was awarded the Order of the Red Banner. Together with Nikolsky (later known as Orlov), head of the economic intelligence department, they met with the Swedish match king Ivar Kruger in 1930 or 1931. Blackmailing (!) Because we would flood Western markets with our cheap matches, they demanded a compensation amount of three hundred thousand American dollars for the Soviet government. The technique worked, the money was received” (ibid., p. 44). Interesting: they also received orders for this?.. Murder, sabotage, theft, blackmail - this is the signature of the Soviet special services operating in Western Europe, America and Asia long before the start of World War II: a tireless “struggle for peace”... Of course, in those unforgettable At times, it was not only the NKVD and GRU who were engaged in openly immoral activities: British, French, Polish and especially German spies did not hesitate to use the most base means and methods in achieving their goals. But to blackmail a Swedish oligarch like this - for some three hundred thousand dollars: it just doesn’t fit in my head... I will return to the work of the former saboteur Sudoplatov more than once in this and other works in the series: his memories are filled with such facts “under the beginning." That’s why I had to hunt for this bestseller, published in 1998, for almost six months! It seems that even with Yeltsin allowing a lot, the revelations of the old security officer seemed too shocking! But let’s return to the German Note and talk about the next irritant that did not suit Hitler...
3) Bolshevization of countries given over to Stalin.
From the text of the Note, it becomes clear that Hitler had reason to believe that the USSR would not annex the above-mentioned countries and territories, and would not carry out their forcible Sovietization. It is difficult to say to what extent Hitler's indignation in this case is sincere: after all, this was to be expected. And the National Socialists themselves did the same thing on the occupied lands. For example, the actions of the SD in the occupied territories of Poland, aimed at destroying the Polish elite, almost completely coincided with the actions of the NKVD. When comparing the “Nazification” and “Bolshevisation” measures, one gets the impression that the corresponding plans were written in the same office.
I must say that a few months after writing this phrase, I purchased the already mentioned book by Lawrence Reese - “World War II. Behind Closed Doors. Stalin, the Nazis and the West." In particular, it provides the following facts: “Representatives of the Gestapo and the NKVD... met in Lvov in October 1939 to discuss issues of mutual interest. Subsequently, Heinrich Himmler, chief of the SS, and Merkulov, Beria’s deputy, met in Berlin in November 1940” (p. 54). What did the “comrades in arms” discuss? Here’s what: “...recent research shows that some actions - like the Krakow arrest of Polish professors by the Nazis in November 1939 ( this episode is shown in Wajda's film "Katyn". – Approx. author) and similar arrests carried out at the same time by the NKVD at the universities of Lvov - were discussed and coordinated between functionaries of the secret services of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union" (ibid.). It turns out that my remark about “the same office” is not so far from the truth...
From the text of the Note, something else becomes clear: the Fuhrer was very upset by the fact that after the seizure of countries that were part of the Soviet “zone” of interests, the USSR broke the agreements on their economic cooperation with the Reich - that is, he not only offended, but also “hit his pocket.” ";
4) the rude behavior of the Soviet government during the annexation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina.
The Germans were deeply outraged by how cynically Stalin chose the moment for another expansion. Let me remind you that this happened at the height of Operation Gelb in France, when the Wehrmacht, figuratively speaking, found itself with its “pants off” and was powerless to do anything in the East, where at that time there were only six (according to other sources - ten) German security divisions. But there were other grievances as well. In particular, the USSR did not comply with the German request and did not give the Romanians time to evacuate the territories occupied by the Red Army. Moreover, Soviet troops entered there even before the expiration of the ultimatum they announced. Finally, Northern Bukovina, which had never previously belonged to the Russian Empire, was not at all part of the “deal” formalized by the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Stalin “chopped it off” in the most unceremonious manner, taking advantage of the complete powerlessness of Germany, almost all of whose troops at that moment were fighting in France or were involved in other directions (Norway). Thus, the Soviet Union received an additional springboard for launching air and ground attacks on the Romanian oil fields - the only serious source of fuel for the Reich, besides Soviet supplies and synthetic fuel plants. Actually, it was precisely under the impression of this “liberation” campaign that Hitler in July 1940 first spoke about preparing specific plans for an attack on the USSR, which were finally formalized in the “Barbarossa” directive in December of the same year. On September 20, 1940, Hitler issued another secret directive, ordering a military mission to be sent to Romania: “For the outside world,” W. Shirer quotes the directive, “its task is to help friendly Romania in organizing and training its armed forces. The real objectives, which should not become obvious to either the Romanians or our own troops, should be the following: to defend the oil-bearing areas ... to prepare for the deployment of German and Romanian troops on Romanian bases if a war with Russia is forced on us" ("Rise and Fall III Reich", p. 822). Until the summer of 1940, Hitler did not have the slightest desire to get involved in a war on two fronts, and the desire to end Bolshevism and move to the East belonged to a much later historical perspective. By the way, according to the former secretary of the Fuhrer Christa Schroeder, in the distant future, he was going to “deal with” the “yellow race” (“Not was my chief,” p. 107). This, as is easy to understand, did not at all imply the presence of any specific plans for a German attack on the then ally of the Reich, Japan. Let me remind you that a war with Great Britain and France was not included in his plans or in the plans of the German military, at least until 1944. Austrian military historian Heinz Magenheimer in the article “Strategy of the Soviet Union: offensive, defensive, preventive?” also emphasizes that the main task when issuing the “technical specifications” for the creation of the Barbarossa plan was the following: “To defeat the Russian army or at least to seize as much Russian territory as to prevent enemy raids on Berlin and the Silesian industrial areas” (collection “ The truth of Viktor Suvorov-2", p. 140);
5) sabotage of agreed deliveries of strategic raw materials to Germany.
I must say that the documents at my disposal indicate the opposite: German representatives said in correspondence with each other that the USSR was fulfilling its agreements in full. The Germans themselves sabotaged supplies to the Soviet Union, and Soviet intelligence knew and reported about this. In this regard, R. Irinarkhov reports the following: “On March 22, 1941, Moscow received information that the German government had issued a secret order to suspend the execution of industrial orders for the Soviet Union” (“The Red Army in 1941,” p. 369) . W. Shirer testifies: “What the Germans received in the first year was registered by the OKW ( Supreme High Command of the Wehrmacht. – Approx. ed.) - one million tons of grains, half a million tons of wheat, 900 thousand tons of oil, 100 thousand tons of cotton, 500 thousand tons of phosphates, a significant amount of other raw materials and one million tons of soybeans in transit from Manchuria” (“The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” , p. 685). Let us emphasize again that in exchange for the products taken from Soviet peasants and workers, Germany supplied the USSR not with consumer goods, but with the most modern weapons and technologies for their production. Moreover, Stalin offered the Germans other services not specified in the treaty. In particular, to conduct military operations in Scandinavia and the northern seas, a secret military base in the Murmansk region was placed at the disposal of German submariners. And to escort the Komet raider along the Northern Sea Route to the Pacific Ocean, the Germans used Soviet icebreakers, for which they then sent letters of gratitude to the People's Commissar of the USSR Navy. According to the memoirs of the German military attaché Baumbach, Soviet Admiral Kuznetsov “received with satisfaction the sincere gratitude of Nazi Admiral Raeder” (“World War II. Behind Closed Doors. Stalin, the Nazis and the West,” p. 77). The USSR also offered to purchase on its own behalf such commodity items as Asian rubber and soybeans, in order to then transfer them to Germany (see “Memorandum of Dr. Schnurre, German Foreign Ministry of February 11, 1940”, “Memorandum of Dr. Schnurre, German Foreign Ministry dated April 5, 1941”, “Memorandum of Dr. Schnurre, German Foreign Ministry dated May 15, 1941”, pp. 171-175 of the collection “The Eve and Beginning of War”). From the memorandums of the German Foreign Ministry, in particular, it becomes clear that the Germans were even offered a 50 percent tariff discount for transportation along the Trans-Siberian Railway from Asian countries.
Finally, judging by Goebbels’ diaries, the Soviet leadership constantly provided political and moral support to the Reich: articles in Pravda and Izvestia in support of Germany and against its blockade by the British appeared with enviable regularity almost until the very beginning of the war;
6) agreeing, in principle, to join the Tripartite Pact, at the end of 1940 the Soviet Union put forward conditions unacceptable to Hitler: 1 - give him Bulgaria “according to the Baltic” option”; 2 – put joint pressure on Turkey in order to obtain its consent to the creation of Soviet land and naval bases in the straits; 3 – give the USSR the opportunity to finish off Finland.
It is interesting that the materials at my disposal (the report of Ambassador Schulenburg to Ribbentrop dated November 26, 1940, cited in the same collection “The Eve and Beginning of War”) fully confirm the above-mentioned demands of Stalin and Molotov. It's strange, but Nota doesn't mention two more Soviet wishes: force Japan to give up its rights to coal and oil concessions in Northern Sakhalin and allow the USSR to access the Persian Gulf (apparently through the occupation of Iran and Iraq);
7) support for the illegal government of Yugoslavia, which came to power as a result of an anti-German coup and signing a friendship treaty with the conspirators.
I would like to emphasize that many modern historians consider this particular event, which occurred in early April 1941, to be the “point of no return” in Soviet-German relations. Let me also remind you that judging by quotes from the pro-Soviet newspaper of the Swedish Communist Party, published by the American New York Times, the same opinion was shared in the Kremlin and, of course, in Berlin;
8) the extremely negative reaction of the USSR to the appearance of German troops in Bulgaria, which Stalin actually unilaterally “stakes out” as a zone of his own strategic interests and de facto has already ceased to be considered a sovereign power;
9) the concentration of Soviet troops on the border with the Reich since 1940: “The High Command of the Wehrmacht,” says the Note, “since the beginning of the year, has repeatedly pointed out to the foreign policy leadership of the Reich the increasing threat to the territory of the Reich from the Russian army and at the same time emphasized that the reason for this strategic concentration and deployment of troops can only be aggressive plans. These messages from the Supreme High Command of the Wehrmacht will be made available to the public with all the details. If there was the slightest doubt about the aggressiveness of the strategic concentration and deployment of Russian troops, they were completely dispelled by the messages received by the Wehrmacht High Command in recent days. After the general mobilization in Russia, at least 160 divisions were deployed against Germany. The results of observations in recent days indicate that the created group of Russian troops, especially motorized and tank formations, allows the Russian Supreme Command to begin aggression at any time on different sections of the German border.”
Note that Hitler and his military leadership had no idea about the true scale of the Soviet military concentration:
1) not 160, but 171+ divisions of five border districts were gathered close to the border itself - the first strategic echelon in full force, which included at least 3 million military personnel as of June 22, 1941;
2) in May-June, at least 77 more divisions from seven armies of the internal districts were transferred to the border districts or were planned to be transferred in early July - this was the second strategic echelon, numbering at least another million troops;
3) at least three armies of the third strategic echelon began to form;
4) the German General Staff could not figure out that the main Soviet attack was planned not in Germany, but in Romania - from the territory of Ukraine. The basis of the plan of the Soviet command was to cut off Germany from the only source of fuel in Europe, in addition to Soviet supplies from Baku and synthetic fuel factories, in Europe and thereby cause a quick and inevitable defeat of the Reich;
5) neither Hitler nor his General Staff presented a real picture of the resource, industrial and technological superiority of the Soviet Union.
I also find very interesting the following information given in the Note about the plans of the USSR, which was contained in the secret report of the Yugoslav military attache in Moscow captured by the Germans in Belgrade: “According to data received from Soviet circles, the rearmament of the Air Force, tank forces and artillery is in full swing, taking into account experience of modern warfare, which will be largely completed BY AUGUST 1941. THIS PERIOD, OBVIOUSLY, IS ALSO THE TERMINAL (TEMPORARY) POINT UNTIL WHICH SHOULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO TALKABLE CHANGES IN THE SOVIET FOREIGN POLICY.” Thus, Hitler made it clear exactly when he expected a Soviet attack: no later than the end of July 1941.
The following paragraph also indicates that Hitler perfectly understood Stalin’s game (he, however, understood the game of the Fuhrer himself even better): “... the Reich government came to the conviction that LENIN’s thesis, once again clearly stated in the “Directive of the Communist Party of Slovakia” dated October 1939, according to which “it is possible to conclude treaties with other countries if they serve the interests of the Soviet government and neutralize the enemy,” was also used when concluding the 1939 treaties. Thus, the conclusion of friendship treaties was only a tactical maneuver for the Soviet government. The only goal for Russia was to conclude agreements beneficial to it and at the same time create the preconditions for further strengthening the influence of the Soviet Union. The main idea was to weaken the non-Bolshevik states so that it would be easier to disintegrate them and defeat them at the right moment. This was reflected with brutal clarity in a Russian document found after the occupation at the Soviet legation in Belgrade, which states: “The USSR will react only at the right moment. The Axis powers have dispersed their armed forces even further, and therefore the USSR will suddenly strike Germany.”
In a word, Hitler absolutely correctly understood Stalin’s plan. Especially after he pulled off a masterly trick with the timely “liberation” of the piece of Poland due to him, for which the West not only did not declare war on the new aggressor, but even reluctantly “showed understanding of such actions.” However, as already mentioned, for this, the “possessed” did not have to read the secret directives of the Comintern: the same thing could be learned by leafing through the materials of the pre-war congresses of the CPSU (b) published in huge editions (especially the XVIII) and from even more widespread Soviet newspapers. Let us also note that the Fuhrer’s insight came too late: Germany first unexpectedly got involved in a world war, and then - again, unwillingly - found itself waging a war on two fronts. That is, having understood Stalin’s plans, Hitler nevertheless lost and lost everything, including his own life. Finally, it is impossible not to mention that, while describing the Bolshevik perfidy, the German government modestly kept silent about the fact that in its activities it was guided by an equally unprincipled attitude towards all kinds of international treaties and laws. If the USSR was expelled from the League of Nations for bombing civilians in Finland, then Germany left the pre-war prototype of the UN at its own request - in order to demonstrate to the peoples of the world its complete disregard for them.
Another paragraph of the Note talks about the “historical riddle” that historians of the Second World War have been trying to solve for decades: “... the recently published TASS refutation, which portrayed the relations between Germany and Soviet Russia as completely correct. These diversionary maneuvers, which are in blatant contradiction with the actual policy of the Soviet government, could not mislead the Reich government.” That is, here it is - the solution to Stalin’s “refutation” according to Hitler: this just a failed attempt to cover up hostile intentions.
To make it more clear what we are talking about, we will present fragments of the text of the Soviet refutation mentioned by the Note (I believe that we are talking about it, and not about the TASS Message/Statement of June 13) dated May 8, 1941:
“Japanese newspapers publish reports from the Domei Tsushin agency, which say that the Soviet Union is concentrating large forces on the western borders... The concentration of troops on the western borders is being carried out on an extremely large scale. In this regard, passenger traffic on the Siberian Railway has been stopped, since troops from the Far East are being transferred mainly to the western borders. Large military forces are also being transferred there from Central Asia... TASS is authorized to declare that this suspiciously loud (!) message by Domei Tsusin, borrowed from an unknown United Press correspondent, is the fruit of the sick imagination of its authors... there is no “concentration of large military forces” on the western borders of the USSR no and not expected. The grain of truth contained in Domei Tsusin’s message, conveyed moreover in a grossly distorted form, is that one rifle division is being transferred from the Irkutsk region to the Novosibirsk region - due to better conditions in Novosibirsk. Everything else in Domei Tsushin’s message is pure fiction.” Yeager Oscar
CHAPTER TWO Twenty Years and Internecine Wars. - War with the Allies and complete unity of Italy. Sulla and Marius: the first war with Mithridates; first internecine war. Dictatorship of Sulla (100-78 BC) Livius Drusus proposes reforms Government power at the moment
From the book World History. Volume 1. The Ancient World by Yeager OscarCHAPTER THREE General state of affairs: Gnaeus Pompey. - War in Spain. - Slave war. - War with sea robbers. - War in the East. - Third war with Mithridates. - Conspiracy of Catiline. - Return of Pompey and the first triumvirate. (78–60 BC) General
From the book The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Gibbon EdwardCHAPTER XVIII The character of Constantine. - War with the Goths. - Death of Constantine. - Dividing the empire between his three. sons. - Persian War. - The tragic death of Constantine the Younger and Constant. - Usurpation of Magnentius. - Internecine war. - Victory Constantius.
From the book Textbook of Russian History author Platonov Sergey Fedorovich§ 152. Russian-Persian War 1826–1828, Russian-Turkish War 1828–1829, Caucasian War In the first years of the reign of Emperor Nicholas I, Russia waged great wars in the east - with Persia (1826–1828) and Turkey (1828–1829). Relations with Persia became cloudy at the beginning of the 19th century, due to
From the book History of World Civilizations author Fortunatov Vladimir ValentinovichChapter 5 World War II and the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet people § 27. Increasing danger of war in the 1930s In the 1930s. the threat of a new big war was growing rapidly. Some believe that the decisive step towards war was taken with the signing of the German-Soviet pact on
From the book Conquest of the Wild West. "A good Indian is a dead Indian" author Stukalin Yuri ViktorovichNorthern Plains. Blackfeet: the undeclared war, 1806–1870 In the first half of the 19th century. American trappers and fur traders were often attacked by Indians. However, the trappers turned out to be such serious opponents that it was impossible to openly engage with them.
From the book "Mossad" - the first half century author Kunz IUndeclared war On May 8, 1972, Palestinians hijacked a Belgian airliner. Sabena flight number 571 was heading from Brussels to Tel Aviv and landed on schedule at Lod Airport. There, terrorists, threatening with weapons, detained the passengers of the Boeing 707 and demanded
From the book Naval Rivalries and Conflicts 1919 - 1939 author Taras Anatoly EfimovichChapter 11. THE UNDECLARED WAR IN THE BALTIC IN 1918–1919 At the end of 1918, after the surrender of Germany, the borders of the states of Eastern Europe had not yet been officially determined. Their final pattern was to be established after the suppression of the revolution in Russia. Management
From the book The Defeat of Japan and the Samurai Threat author Shishov Alexey VasilievichCHAPTER 3 YEAR 1939. Undeclared war in the desert. Khalkhin Gol River The test of strength at Lake Khasan forced the Japanese high command to admit to themselves that the previously developed strategic plans for an offensive war against the USSR were “outdated” in time. Japanese people in summer
From the book Book 2. We change dates - everything changes. [New chronology of Greece and the Bible. Mathematics reveals the deception of medieval chronologists] author Fomenko Anatoly Timofeevich14. The medieval Greek war of 1374–1387 is the “ancient” Peloponnesian War 14.1. Three eclipses described by Thucydides “In 431 BC. e. the twenty-seven-year Peloponnesian War (431–404) began, which engulfed the entire Hellenic world and shook all of Hellas to its foundations.”
From the book History of the Cavalry [no illustrations] author Denison George Taylor From the book Not There and Not Then. When did World War II begin and where did it end? author Parshev Andrey PetrovichSecond Soviet-Polish War. Guerrilla war in Poland in 1944–1947 Russia and Poland have always laid claim to the role of leading powers in the Slavic world. The conflict between Moscow and Warsaw began at the end of the 10th century over border towns on the territory of what is now Western Europe.
From the book Stalin. Beyond good and evil author Ushakov Alexander GennadievichPART IV THE UNDECLARED WAR
From the book If You Tear Off the Mask... author Sergeev Fedor MikhailovichChapter 6 THE UNDECLARED WAR AGAINST THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC A short excursion into history For many decades, American ruling circles sought to create a “closed system” of interstate relations in the Western Hemisphere. Monroe Doctrine and
From Zagogulin's book in the President's briefcase author Lagodsky Sergey AlexandrovichUndeclared war By a secret decree of November 30, a group was created to manage actions to disarmament and liquidate armed groups, introduce and maintain a state of emergency on the territory of the Chechen Republic, consisting of: Grachev P.S.
Apparently, everyone noticed the unusual weather situation this year. Let us recall that in July 2010, the “world government”, under the full control of which the United States is, used meteorological weapons against European and many other countries, which caused abnormal heat in some places, and cold and floods in others...
The cause of the heat, according to forecasters from the Hydrometeorological Center of the Russian Federation, was an anomalous “blocking” anticyclone that has been hanging over the territory of central Russia for more than a month. This is more than strange, since usually such anticyclones last no more than a couple of weeks and are then replaced by cold air fronts. Studying the anomaly, meteorologists recorded very high pressure in the middle troposphere at altitudes of 5 km, where the atmosphere is heated not only below, but also in the thickness. The situation is completely outlandish: the entire multi-kilometer column is very hot. There has never been a blocking anticyclone of such duration and intensity in our area in the entire history of instrumental observations. Meteorologists do not have a clear answer about the reasons for the anomaly (http://www.expert.ru/articles/2010/08/02/august?esr=4).
But what meteorologists could not understand, due to their level of competence, was able to explain by academician Nikolai Viktorovich Levashov. The unprecedented heat was created with the help of powerful ground-based emitting antennas, which synchronously transmitted a microwave signal to orbiting satellites located in the geostationary orbit of our planet. They received and re-radiated the signal back to Earth, creating an ion lens in the upper atmosphere.
As a result of these actions, the ozone layer “opened”, and hard cosmic radiation, hitting the Earth, became the cause of “”. “Geological weapons were also used against us,” explained Academician N. Levashov live on the Russian News Service radio station.
RuAN correspondents decided to inform their readers in more detail about this issue.
Information about the principles of operation of meteorological weapons appeared from the “world government” a long time ago, but the technical level of development of our civilization for a long time did not allow us to implement this knowledge in a prototype. The time to put theory into practice came in the mid-80s of the last century, within the framework of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program, better known as the “” program. In 1986, the US Department of Defense Advanced Research and Development Agency adopted a number of programs aimed at developing combat weapons with sources of electromagnetic radiation. Officially, in 1990, a military complex began to be built near Anchorage (Alaska). It took quite a long time to build, which suggests that the work was completed much earlier than the official completion date of the project.
Today, the complex consists of a group of antennas, an incoherent radiation radar with a twenty-meter diameter antenna, laser locators, magnetometers, computers for signal processing and antenna field control. The entire complex is powered by a powerful gas power plant and six diesel generators. The deployment of the complex and research on it is carried out by the Phillips Laboratory, located at the US Air Force Base in Kirtland, New Mexico. Subordinate to it are the laboratories of astrophysics, geophysics and weapons of the US Air Force Space Technology Center (For more information about this system, see the article “Pathological Belligerence”)...
The fact that Russian meteorologists know nothing about these studies and the effects of using meteorological weapons is, in general, normal. But scientists at defense research institutes and our military experts are well aware of this. For example, a former military weather forecaster, retired captain of the second rank Nikolay Karavaev talks about the use of weather weapons against Russia in 2010:
“Anticyclonic impact (when the atmosphere is cleared of cloud cover, and a breakthrough of heated air from adjacent areas is provoked into the impact zone) leads not only to demoralization of the population and troops, loss of crops, but also to purely applied military problems: in heated air, the flight range of winged aircraft increases missiles, the damage from air and missile strikes is increasing, etc.”(http://svpressa.ru/society/article/28154/)
Military observer, former press secretary of the Russian Minister of Defense Viktor Nikolaevich Baranets:
“HAARP is associated with a series of man-made disasters and strange climate phenomena that have been observed in Europe and America in recent years. Italians cannot understand where the typhoon that tormented their country came from in 2002, which (according to weather forecasters) could not have come close..."(“Komsomolskaya Pravda”, Moscow, No. 28, 02/12/2004).
Vladimir Ashuganov, Major General, Doctor of Technical Sciences, head of a unit of the Research Institute of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation:
“I have the impression that some authoritative Russian scientists belittle the true significance of HAARP and even call it the fiction of amateurs. So listen. When super-powerful locators appeared in the world (including in Russia), it turned out that they were capable of “warming up” the ionosphere in certain areas. We were able to establish a direct connection between these heating events and magnetic storms and other phenomena (there are many of them). The Americans didn't sleep either. And when both we and they realized what opportunities were opening up here (I also mean the defensive aspects), then the boom began... It’s still going on...”(KP http://kp.ru/daily/23215/26591/).
And finally, on September 11, 2002, State Duma of the Russian Federation a draft resolution was heard (agenda item 10) “On the appeal of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation “To the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin about the potential danger for humanity of continuing large-scale experiments on the targeted and powerful impact of high-frequency radio waves on the near-Earth environment.” The deputy reported Astrakhankina Tatyana Aleksandrovna, we will give only a small quote from the official speech to show the seriousness of the issue and the level of experts:
“I emphasize and remind you once again: Ivanov’s speech (Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation 2001-2007, Colonel General of the Reserve) is further proof that today we must make a balanced and thoughtful decision regarding this new type of weapons. Dear colleagues, I ask you to accept these appeals so that the necessary international long-term decisions can be made, which is extremely important in connection with the US withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. Leading experts on this issue have been invited to the meeting today: Kunitsyn Vyacheslav Evgenievich, professor, head of the department of atmospheric physics, Perunov Yuri Mitrofanovich, general designer of the Central Research Institute of Radio Instrumentation, Plaksin Alexander Alexandrovich, member of the section on defense problems of the Ministry of Defense under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences, colonel of the General Staff . And if there is a need, both I and they will give additional clarification on the topic defined above. I ask, colleagues, to take this problem very seriously...”
It is characteristic that then the resolution could not be adopted; it was postponed from day to day and was held out until the end of the spring session. As a result, the appeal to the president and the international community was nevertheless sent, but on behalf of 90 deputies who signed it. Military experts and scientists wrote a closed appeal to the president - based on top-secret materials. Unfortunately, it was not possible to achieve the necessary public resonance then, but it became clear who in the State Duma of the 1999-2003 convocation worked for the “world government.”
The trouble, which they knew about in advance but did nothing about, came to Russia in June 2010. The first one reported it and began to take countermeasures. On June 24, at a meeting with readers of his books, he reported that we had been attacked and the retaliatory actions he had taken. In particular, revealing the plans of the “world government,” Nikolai Viktorovich noted that the heat was supposed to destroy the entire harvest of wheat and other grain crops in Russia and Europe. Last year's wheat reserves would quickly run out in the winter, and in the spring the governments of different countries would have no choice but to buy genetically modified wheat in . Here we must take into account that the seeds of GM wheat are sterile, and you cannot get more than one harvest from them. Thus, the “world government” tried to “kill two birds with one stone”: to ensure stable demand for ever new batches of GM seeds (they would hook all the countries of Eurasia on the grain “needle”), and on the other hand, they would ensure the rapid extinction of our peoples, since the use of GMOs is guaranteed to lead to infertility (see material).
Now we can say that in Europe and part of Russia these plans failed, the harvest could not be destroyed, according to forecasts in Russia it will be around 60 million tons of grain. Plus, significant stocks will remain in warehouses from last year. Taking into account the fact that on August 5, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin announced a ban on the export of grain, these reserves should be enough for our country until next year.
Everything that didn’t die... burn it!
As time passes, the second stage of the plan to attack Russia in 2010 becomes clear. By artificially creating unprecedented, long-lasting heat, our opponents created ideal conditions for fires to occur. They decided to burn everything that the drought could not destroy. Since mid-June, the situation with Russia has sharply worsened; many settlements have been caught in a ring of fire, and according to the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations, as of August 7, more than 3.5 thousand people were left homeless in Russia, and in the 12 regions most affected by the fires, 1,940 houses burned down.
The capital was shrouded in smoke from fires in the Moscow region. Official bodies, in order to avoid panic, hide the real causes of fires, attributing everything to careless handling of fire. But the Internet is starting to let us know what's really going on. Arson- this is the reason for the greater number of fires in July-August 2010. Not only forests and fields with crops that have not yet been harvested are burning, but also important strategic objects. On July 29, an aviation technical base of the Russian Navy burned down as a result of a fire near the city of Kolomna. 200 aircraft units worth a total of 20 billion rubles were destroyed.
On the same day and in the same area, a fire occurred at the central airborne equipment storage base for the Airborne Forces. On August 8, the workshops of the design bureau (KBM, city), which developed the Iskander missile system, superior to its foreign analogues in all characteristics, burned down. The same design bureau also developed Igla, an ultra-modern, high-precision means of combating enemy air forces at close ranges. A few days earlier, a crown fire nearly burned down the military unit of the missile attack warning center. It is clear that the targets for the arson were carefully chosen, and if the center had burned down, the country would have suffered multi-billion dollar damage, and the capital's missile defense would have been undermined.
Fires are burning all over Russia, but we do not see the full picture of losses. Unlike us, having a full picture of events, the president reacted to the burning naval base in an uncharacteristically harsh manner for his liberal leadership style. He fired the chief of logistics of the Navy Sergei Sergeev, the chief of naval aviation of the Navy Nikolai Kuklev, his deputy Sergei Rasskazov, the acting deputy chief of naval aviation for logistics Sergei Manakov and Viktor Biront, the head of the base where the fire occurred. The Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, Vladimir Vysotsky, was issued a warning about incomplete official compliance. More than once the fire approached critical infrastructure facilities - nuclear power plants in Sarov and. Only the courage and heroism of our firefighters made it possible to save them from the fire.
And on the night of August 4, a fire occurred at the Moscow oil refinery in Kapotnya. A pump in one of the plant's distillation units caught fire. The fire was assigned the second complexity number. The fuel supply to the pump was stopped, and the remaining oil burned out quite quickly. It is also reported that the height of the flame reached two meters. Due to the fire, the work of the enterprise was suspended (http://www.gudok.ru/sociaty/proishestvia/news.php?ID=358482). If the fire had reached the fuel tanks, then in the metropolis, in the literal sense of the word, a very serious environmental disaster would have occurred. Even if the fire from the oil refinery had not spread to nearby neighborhoods, the smoke from the burning fuel would have mixed with the smoke from the burning peat bogs and forests near Moscow.
Let us remember that at that moment the maximum permissible concentration of carbon monoxide in the air was already exceeded 4-5 times! If the plant in Kapotnya had exploded, it would have been from poisoning by combustion products millions of city residents would die. And this is no longer a joke, the authorities hide information about arson in order to avoid panic, but in fact, the heads of administrations of the Moscow and Bryansk regions announced rewards for the arsonists...
It so happened that this article was written on the anniversary of Georgia’s five-day war against South Ossetia on 08/08/2008. Then, supplied with weapons and trained by American-Israeli instructors, Georgian troops attacked the civilian population of the city of Tskhinvali. Later, during the investigative measures, it was possible to establish that the Georgians - one of many Semitic peoples - did not just want to capture the city, they wanted to kill all Ossetians. They were planning genocide. intervened and did not allow the plans of the “world government” to be realized. Our enemies have not forgotten this victory. Today, it is being waged against Russia, against you and me. undeclared war. We are already suffering human losses, and they are much more significant than what is stated in official sources.
They are not going to spare us, they want to destroy us all. Let some die earlier, and some later, but the verdict on the Slavs was pronounced by the “world government” a long time ago. And this sentence is death.