Politically speaking. Why the fuck didn’t the white army just starve out the bolshiveks? From what I read the white army controlled the rural areas and the reds had the cities. So why didn’t they just starve them out? And what does this mean for then the inevitable rural vs urban American civil war starts?
Russian civil war
Brayden Parker
Other urls found in this thread:
Grayson Flores
Well user, it's because they would have had to hold all that territory. If they were capable of sieging all major cities to stop food getting in, they would be capable of destroying their enemies. However they were not, so could not.
Additionally, Bolsheviks were funded by international Jewry of the time, which meant they had the old timey equivelent of the infinite money printer, whereas the Whites had to struggle with massive resource constraints e.g. reality.
Charles Brooks
It means you must kill the jews before they initiate a violent revolution, convincing people it is for their own benefit to surrender property and freedom.
Lucas Ramirez
I think the Red army was more unified compared to the whites. The Whites had way to Manny splinter groups like Kolchak in Siberia, Denkin and later Wrangel in Southern Russia, Sternberg in Mongolia, and other factions. They just could not coordinate together Kolchak himself declared himself supreme ruler of Russia.
Levi Peterson
Despite what flyover states think, cities are where manpower is concentrated, and are more important than rural areas.
Nathaniel Reyes
Alright so they
1. Couldn’t siege the cities properly
2. Funded by Jews
3. Were too splintered
What is the difference between then and now if you compare modern America to Russia? Maybe team red groups could siege every city but even then that’s a maybe. I don’t have to explain the second. And while team blue can’t fracture beyond progressive vs establishment, team red has Mormons, Libertarians, Civnats, white nationalists, confederates, separatists and probably more. This is telling me team red might be fucked
Xavier Watson
Bolshiveks had much higher morale.
Thomas Howard
I agree unified organization would be the hardest point BUT some pluses are modern American peasants are significantly better armed, modern infrastructure is significantly more vulnerable/fragile and it's far easier to create grass roots organization structures.
The goal in such an event would not be sieges, but sustained constant harassments to degrade the hegemons ability (e.g. fuel plants, depots, highways, barracks, cmd posts, satelites, etc) to fight while minimizing losses, spreading the good word and creating alternate power structures to fill the vacuums you yourself will create as the war drags on.
It would be a generational struggle as blue team has massive inertia on their side, from deep seated propaganda to vast stockpiles and powerful existing command structures.
Brayden Barnes
Cities is where you control a country from
rural vs urban american civil war = redneck hunting by the gubernmint
Tyler Gomez
Why didn´t retarded westoids intervene? Amerimutts sent 600k to fight Germany for literally no reason but sent like five guys to fight Bolshevism? Fucking kikes.
Elijah Mitchell
Kolchak was also a stubborn faggot. Finland and some other formerly Russian territories had troops ready and were willing to assist him as long as he guaranteed their independence but he refused.
Ryan Evans
The white army and the interventionists were such niggers during occupation that literal Cossack anarchists in modern Ukraine requested Red Army assisstance (and paid for it with their independence)
Robert Walker
Why would boshelviks fight boshelviks?
Brody Adams
The communists had better funding(mostly japan) and were closer to sweeden, which followed its tradition to sell steel, know how and actual products (but mostly high grade steel) to EVERYONE no matter how good or bad their are, as long as they pay.
At the same time the white army was treated by the ally as a betrayer, while the central powers loved the idea of having to have fewer troops on the eastern front.
ah and backstabbing among the whites. Everyone wanted to be the next Kierensky.
Charles Phillips
Cities are overrated now. Maybe when they were centers of industrial power then they were of use but how much of that gross domestic product that is there can actually be turned into military might nowadays? Starbucks and Jewbook don´t win wars.
Jaxon Bennett
>nah, some of the ukrainian nationalists asked for soviet intervention (which by the way made no sense because Lenin and Pilsudki , who knew each other personaly, and whose brothers were shot on the same day, came to aggrement of Poles not getting involved in the civil war and for that getting Cholm region and Podlasie) because Poles whooped their asses and took over Kiev.
Ethan Hughes
>Bolsheviks were funded by international Jewry of the time
This.
Asher Wright
this
daily reminder to get out of cities and also go to a completely landlocked place where nobody lives.muhhhhhh plants muhhh agriculture muhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hunting yeeeeehaaaawwwwwwwwwww
youtube.com
Z
Josiah Collins
>Although Jews were not a larger majority in the Soviet Union than, for example, Germans, Poles, or the Baltic people, their dominance in the Leadership of the NKVD is tremendous: They represented the biggest single group, even before the Russians, who numbered more than 30-times as many people as the Jews. It can be assumed that the over-representation of Jews in leading positions of the USSR in general and the NKVD or its predecessors in particular may have been even greater in the years prior to Stalin's rule; at least it can be assumed that the initial enthusiasm of members of ethnic or religious minorities for the new Soviet regime, as it was described by Petrov, decreased with the years between 1918 and 1934, that is, during 17 years of uninterrupted terror. Such a reduction of the Jewish portion will have resulted only for statistical reasons, simply because of the sheer numbers of Russians, it was more likely that a Russian would occupy an available position rather than a Jew.
The extent to how Jewish Bolsheviks were can not be understated. It is the sole reason for the Eastern European pogroms and massacres. The Jews deserved it, simple as.
Jack Baker
Most of the money they used between 1904 and 1921 was from Japan and to be specific from the foreign inteligance branch of the japanese military.
The funding gathered from jews all across the world was minimal. And if you mean the transfers that came from the US and UK, the money was used for trade and its orgin was Japan. So it wasn't jewish money in any shape or form. In fact, if one counts military help as money too(mostly resources in form of ammo and weapons), then Germans gave more to the reds, then the jewish communist movment did.
Adam Hall
Well good luck getting a grant to write about it. "Everyone" knows about the pogroms of 1905, and the exodus west. Revolution and racial persecution by EVERYONE of the poor jewish community in russia. Bialystok pogrom started it all. It is when it all started. Somehow all the western historians(and not a few slavic ones too), what started it. Bundsman threw grenades at the ortodox easter procession, there were women and children killed. The socialists fled to the jewish district and the jewish kahal there didn't want to give them to the Russian soldiers. the russian soldiers(mostly cossacks), encircle the district, but didn't enter it out of a fear of being ambushed. Well around 800 men civilian, and an unknown number of women and children, did not have such fear. They "entered" the district and beat up everyone. Bundsman , Sionist or ortodox. it didn't matter. what did matter was the holy standards and icons laying splintered in the mud and the killed women and children. But we can't talk about that.