History questions not worth their own thread V

Status
Not open for further replies.
How much did Stalin have to do with the Red Army's defeat at Warsaw in 1920? IIRC he
was Tukhachevskii's political officer or some such.

Stalin in 1920 was head of the Revolutionary War Council of the South-Western Front - and de facto he was in charge of this Front.

The South-Western Front was not the one which fought in the battle of Warsaw - it was attacking on the direction Lviv - Cracow.

However, on 13 August 1920 Commander in Chief of the Red Army - Sergey Kamenev - issued an order No 4774/op/1052, in which he ordered the South-Western Front to support the weak and exposed southernmost flank of the Western Front - which was protected only by the Mozyr Group (under Tikhon Khvesin), operating south of the 16th Army of this Front.

According to this order the South-Western Front should have advanced with its two northernmost armies - 12th Army and 1st Cavalry Army (Semyon Budyonny) - in north-western direction, in order to support the Mozyr Group against a possible Polish attack. He also ordered sending reinforcements to the Western Front, in order to capture Warsaw as fast as possible.

Stalin, however, refused to carry out this order and substantiated his refusal in a telegram No 13820 sent to Kamenev on 14 August.

As the result of Stalin's refusal, northern wing could not help the Mozyr Group until 20 August 1920, when the Soviet unsuccessful assaults of Lviv were halted and the 1st Cavalry Army was finally sent towards Zamosc in order to help the Western Front.

But on 20 August, the Western Front - and especially the overextended Mozyr Group on its southern flank - was already in tatters (the Polish counteroffensive started on 13 August and by 25 August the Western Front was completely annihilated). Moreover - the 1st Cavalry Army, unsupported by the 12th Army, was nevertheless defeated in combats near Zamosc by 29 August.

On 1 September Joseph Stalin's "request for his discharge from military service" was accepted by the Politburo.
 
I read a few months ago that Stalin made that decision under orders from Lenin so as to be in position to support a communist uprising in Germany that never eventuated. I asked about it in this thread, but no one responded. Seems like as good a time as any to raise the question again.
 
I thought the main communist uprisings in Europe (Spartacist, Bavarian, and Hungarian) had already been defeated by the time of the Polish-Soviet War and that the German Socialists/Communists were in no position to hold an uprising should the Soviets approach.
 
The Third International believed that the revolts of 1918-19 were the opening shots of a more general conflagration, and they weren't totally bonkers to think it, because things only really settled down in the mid-20s. While it may seem to us in retrospect that the issue was firmly settled by mid-1919, it was nowhere near as apparent to people at the time.
 
I read a few months ago that Stalin made that decision under orders from Lenin so as to be in position to support a communist uprising in Germany that never eventuated. I asked about it in this thread, but no one responded. Seems like as good a time as any to raise the question again.

I'm not sure how that would be possible when the army group that he was the political officer for - Budyonny's - was wasting time beseiging Lvov for prestige reasons, not pushing West behind or in flank to Tukhachevsky.
 
Something Domen said in another thread peaked my interests.

What little known areas of Europe historically (and do not today) boasted exceptional wealth of natural resources? Domen spoke of Silesia which had significant amounts of gold mines though Silesia was always a rich region. A Serbian friend of mine not too long ago boasted at lengths on the "largest gold mines in Europe" (whether that was true or not) in Raska and Kosovo(which were long ago exhausted and no longer exist), which directly allowed the Serbian kingdoms to maintain a very large host of mercenary German and Italian knights.

I'm wondering what other little known areas were similarly significant in the past.

edit: Also no need to exclude the rest of the world. If anyone has an interesting mention or response, go for it.
 
The Minas Gerais state of Brazil was thought of as largely worthless until the late 17th Century, when huge reserves of gold was found (The Brazilian coast has no gold or silver, as the Portuguese painfully realized in the 16th Century, and few people bothered to look further inland). The gold in Minas Gerais would be heavily mined until the early 19th Century, when it ran out - The name ´´Minas Gerais´´ means ´´General Mines´´. However, there are still vast cathedrals in the state with their interiors made largely of gold, and it was this gold that also helped finance the early expansion of the British Empire through a series of exploitative treaties with Portugal.
 
A Serbian friend of mine not too long ago boasted at lengths on the "largest gold mines in Europe" (whether that was true or not) in Raska and Kosovo.

Largest Medieval gold mines of Europe were somewhere in the Kingdom of Hungary as far as I know.

As for Silesia - I only claimed that it had gold mines, not that it had the largest gold mines in Europe. ;)
 
A Serbian friend of mine not too long ago boasted at lengths on the "largest gold mines in Europe" (whether that was true or not) in Raska and Kosovo(which were long ago exhausted and no longer exist), which directly allowed the Serbian kingdoms to maintain a very large host of mercenary German and Italian knights.
Heh, trust Balkans nationalists to treat fortuitous mineral deposits as if it somehow reflects well on the people who happen to be living over them.
 
Heh, trust Balkans nationalists to treat fortuitous mineral deposits as if it somehow reflects well on the people who happen to be living over them.

Serbian nationalists seem to actually celebrate their distant ancestors' crushing defeat at the battle of Kosovo, while their Bosnian counterparts militantly defend the pyramid hoax. Balkan nationalists would be funny if they weren't so murderous.
 
Serbian nationalists seem to actually celebrate their distant ancestors' crushing defeat at the battle of Kosovo.

Texans (or even Americans in general) are celebrating the Alamo as well. I don't see any differences.

Kosovo became a similar legend of a heroic last stand in their fight for freedom for Serbians, as Alamo became for Texans.

Balkan nationalists would be funny if they weren't so murderous.

You are exaggerating their overall level of murderousness in the historical context of murderoussness of mankind as such.

Compared to for example Soviet communists, Balkan nationalists are like sheep compared to wolfs.

Actually Balkan people had many good foreign teachers - usually invaders of their land - in murderoussnes throughout history.
 
The Soviets weren't funny, though, so that's not really the point.
 
Indeed, the Soviets were destroying historical monuments related to "burghers" and "nobles", rather than inventing "aristocratic pyramids".

I don't know what is worse - destroying existing monuments or inventing non-existent ones. But perhaps the former is worse.
 
Polish architects had a hard time to convince new Poland's Communist authorities to rebuild Warsaw's Old Town in its pre-1939 shape.

Only telling them that "workers and peasants have a right to live in similar luxury houses as burghers did" convinced them.

But they insisted on painting funny folk pictures (showing for example people in folk clothings) on walls of some tenement houses.

Another thing is that before 1939 one family lived in one tenement house or one apartment, and after 1945 one family often lived in one room - and other rooms of the same apartment were inhabited by other families. So providing the pre-war luxury of burghers to workers and peasants did not work out well.

And of course not entire Warsaw was rebuild in its pre-1939 shape.

Some buildings which survived the German devastation were even "finished off" by the Communists, even if they could be rebuilt.
 
Okay, so the Soviets were a little funny.
Any country that can turn revolutionary fervor into a sycophantic rehearsal for geriatric bureaucrats is by default funny.

Although fake Maoist wall posters take the cake. "The Policies of Comrade Deng Cause Glorious Chairman Mao to Revolve With Increasing Velocity!"
 
Texans (or even Americans in general) are celebrating the Alamo as well. I don't see any differences.

Kosovo became a similar legend of a heroic last stand in their fight for freedom for Serbians, as Alamo became for Texans.
1. The Alamo rallied the Texans, who eventually won the war. Kosovo helped end the Serbian kingdom's independence.

2. Are you implying that I don't think Texans are crazy nationalists?:p


You are exaggerating their overall level of murderousness in the historical context of murderoussness of mankind as such.

Compared to for example Soviet communists, Balkan nationalists are like sheep compared to wolfs.

Actually Balkan people had many good foreign teachers - usually invaders of their land - in murderoussnes throughout history.
I am doing no such thing. I just said they were murderous, not record-holders in cruelty. After all, they did spend the better part of the 1940s and 1990s carrying out ethnic cleansing. I don't think it's at all controversial to suggest that Balkan nationalism has a very bloody past.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom