About anniversaries and about European integration of Russia. What does Europe think of Russia?B 1953 in Hamburg there was a book “Bilanz des zweiten weltkrieges. Erkenntnisse und Verpflichtungen fur die Zukunft“ (according to a mashinnmo to the translator - “Balance of World War II. Researches and obligations on the future“). In the USSR this book was published almost instantly - in 1957. It was called in our edition “Results of World War II“... Close, but... The German generals honestly wrote - that this book - the management for future eurointegrators of Russia. Though such terms as “European integration“ or “tolerance“, Europe then did not know. Even in the USA Blacks were called then Blacks - and did not see in it anything special.
The book - the collection of memoirs of the German generals. Memories of how they were at war in World War II and as so it developed that Russians hurt them.
The general - the colonel Guderian wrote remarkable article about experience of war with Russia. Casually mentioning Lzhedimitriya`s failure, the Crimean war of the united Europe with Russia in 1854 and World War I, it places emphasis on two of five attempts of war with Russia.
On Karl XII and Napoleon.
Karl XII already in youth became the famous king and the famous commander. It beat at Narva and is later than army of the tsar Pyotr, it beat and broke the Polish king Augustus Silny, it forced to the world (convenient for Swedes) Denmark...
Alas! Though it entered Russia with the 43rd thousand army and beat these Russian barbarians in all fights, and then the general Levengaupt joined it with a huge wagon train, guns and nearly 40000 army, but... The same Levengaupt reached the king, though after the most nice victories over the Russians running from one their look, nevertheless lost the most part of the army (about 5000 reached), all guns and all wagon train.
Approximately the same happened to army of the great and invincible king Karl. After winter in Ukraine, the connected troops 43000 (Karl) and about 40000 (Levengaupt) in the sum made less than 18000 soldiers.
And here and Pyotr with army appeared. And this time the nice victory over barbarians did not turn out...
About Napoleon Guderian wrote with great respect too... Like, the tsar Alexander did not adhere to the Tilsit peace treaty, therefore Napoleon just had to carry out campaign for coercion of Russia to the world - in that form in which it was necessary for Napoleon. And too - wherever battled - everywhere beat Russians.
But!!! The general Moroz interfered and the Russian winter so badly managed with victorious army.
At us anniversary of the Borodino battle approaches. French believe that they won it. Ours consider that we won...
Some agree that it came to an end in a draw. Who is right here? Formally - probably it is correct to speak about a draw.
French did not manage to bring down the Russian troops from positions and to force them to run. And Russians did not manage to force to recede French or, to keep at least on positions which they took at the beginning of battle.
However, some scientists not just compare figures of losses at Borodino, and understand who and that lost. At them leaves that at Borodino Napoleon lost 2/3 cavalries, i.e. his army lost considerable part of the maneuverability. It how presently to lose the most part of tanks - it is possible to be at war after that only defending.
And Europe and all democratic mankind considers us as barbarians who appropriated much what by right has to belong to all mankind (if it is simpler - to them, darlings) - - Siberia with its riches, Baikal, the Northern Sea Route, underwater treasures of the Arctic...