Added: 2 years ago
From: mengutimur
Views: 65,616
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (63)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Poor Russians, they suffer the most casualties in both World Wars but they are often forgotten

  • Zionists

  • I would have been interesting to know the source of this documentary.

  • @marcthenarc BBC Documentary series from the 60s-70s I believe, cant remember the name now.

  • who narrated this?

  • @simoneau1985 Re: " who narrated this? ": it was Michael Redgrave :-)

  • humans :)))))

  • This documentary puts American documentaries to shame.

  • @toqtaqiya Yeah, got to hate the tacky reinactments and instant replays that come with your average American documentries.

  • war sucks balls. such a stupid waste of lives and resources. people are hungry all over the world, but governments would rather spend money to kill people than to save people. Its always some douche that starts a conflict and the opponents have no choice but to fight back. We vote leaders into government, they cause shit and we have to back them up with our blood. Seems like a shitty deal to me.

  • @108Dax

    Well war is needed. Think about the inventions made during the cold war ONLY to fight the russians in a arms race. Who could invent more. Which usually ends up people getting better health care and such.

  • @WolfytheWolf5667 You actually give the counterargument to what you are saying: The Cold War wasn't a war, it was an arms race. The technological advances made during the Cold War were not made because of war, but because of the THREAT of war. These are two different things.

  • @WolfytheWolf5667 war is needed indeed. do not think the well living the US have has been gained with self devotion and skill. america robbed the hell out of any other country to achieve its results, as much as any kind of plague did in the past.

  • @108Dax we cannot change what happened,yet we can change the future..rest in peace all who died there...

  • @108Dax

    My friend, Humanity is a species or war. We kill to save, we fight to protect, and our soldiers die to make sure we can have this chat. You think it's easy to stand on the side lines when your friends and allies are dying in a conflict some douche started. If your best friend was the leader of Russia and they went to war with China, don't tell em that you would just stand by, and watch what happens when your friends life is threaten.

    We are all soldiers, war can not be stopped.

  • helgy2011 thanks

  • The best of European blood, spilled by the Jewish warmongers.

  • The Russian Revolution in 1917 was triggered by a combination of economic breakdown, war weariness, and discontent with the autocratic system of government, and it first brought a coalition of bourgeoisie liberals to power, but their failed policies led to seizure of power by the Bolsheviks on 25 October 1917. Since that time the history of Russia is essentially the history of the Soviet Union, effectively an ideologically based state.

  • @MEpianists All who is glad that Russians lost the war are just foreign social-democratic basterds which doesn't even understand what a civil war means

  • We should all be grateful to Russians who struck at the WWI front. That war was an imperialist useless effort. Any action to undermine war is for the good of humanity.

  • IS NOT russian revolution IS AMERICAN(anglosaxonic) REVOLUTION FOR THE GOLD OF russia

  • @unfukkkmee not american - german. they want russia out of war as fast as they can to conquer France and other west countries. There are some stories, that Lenin was a german agent. and his surname was Blank, not Lenin. But after revolution, America and other countries from Antanta wanted to conquer russia. Somehow Red Army won in that Hell. if not red army, on our world map were 15-20 new countries.

  • @Bentompvp It was a soviet democracy. Google soviet democracy.

  • @cary123

    The Soviet Union is as much of a democracy as China is now

  • @Bentompvp Yes.

    Socialism is the transitional fase between capitalism and socialism or the dictatorship of the proletarian were the proletarian controls the means of production.

    Communism is a stateless classless society were the means of production are commonly owned.

    That was the BOURGEOIS ELECTION Lenin lost, when the new party elections and the new soviet elections came, he won them.

    Stalin didn't make peasants burn there crops in anger, they choose to do that.

  • @cary123 no doubt USSR was better than the tsarist russia, but the real communism has never been applied and stalin did a worse job with the lives of his people, but i think that there russian culture is the thing to blame, not communism. since ww2 and later live in russia was still worth zero, as it had been before communism in the opinion of tsarist autocracy and religion. anyway don' t worry, americans always have to be the best sayin that everything outside their fake democracy sucks...

  • @fullmetaljaco I never claimed it was socialist/communism.

  • @fullmetaljaco Pity Italians don't know Russian culture as well as Russians know the Italian culture. As for value of human life in Russia and in Soviet Union chek in Wiki for numbers. You'll be surprised how different are they from what you are thought.

  • @Bentompvp It's a worthwhile passion. .For instance, the amazing times leading up to and during the First World War. Since about Grade 7 I've been fascinated and always astounded at the convoluted history of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, maybe the only entity that suffered as much as the Russians at that time. There always seems something more to learn. I'm just a dilletante but I've enjoyed myself for decades reading and studying such things. Best.

  • @Bentompvp Socialism or the Dictatorship of the proletarian*, Socialism is the abosulte forum of democracy, learn about what socialism/communism really are.

  • Thing is, Russia was not ready for a war of such scale in 1914. Before you enter a great war, you must first settle the domestic problems that you have. Austria-Hungary had this problem, and they lost...

    Turkey had this problem, and they lost..

    And Russia had this problem..and they....lost

  • @IvanBeSerious Germany lost too.

  • @toqtaqiya Germany didnt lose beacuse they had domestic problems at the start, they lost beacuse these problems started to escalate when the military failed to achieve a progress in the west, both at land and at sea.

  • @IvanBeSerious Doesn't change the fact that Germany lost.

  • @toqtaqiya trollololololololololololol

    

  • @toqtaqiya

    Germany did not lose the first world war.

    they were not occupied by the allies and they agreed to sign a arminstance, they just had no say in it

  • The democracy was replaced by another democracy, a SOVIET FUCKING DEMOCRACY, LEARN THIS YOU IDIOTIC CAPITALISTS.

  • @cary123 is that you Jared Loughner?

  • @MrRascasseman Who?

  • Jesus christ is king of earth

  • Nicholas II just wan't very bright, in fact he was stupid, which is no great handicap in a constitutional monarchy (the Duke of Clarence probably never mastered the nine times table). But unlike that licentious satyr Edward VII, Nicholas actually ruled (when his wife would let him). Bad idea letting a dumb guy run a war. True, Allied generals on the western front were often equally as stupid but they could be replaced without a revolution and never caused the overall misery Russia suffered.

  • @deriter64

    Russia wasn't constitutional and still isnt today, its a Federal semi-presidential republic. and it was a autocracy pre 1917, although in the first revolution 1905, he did make the duma ( parliament) but Nicholas had complete power of that, and could chose to dissolve it when ever he chose. coming back to the fact it was a autocracy.

  • @Bentompvp You know what you'e talking about which is refreshing. But I never said Nicholas' Russia was constitutional, I compared it with the constitutional monarchy of Great Britain. There is no doubt tsarist Russia was an autocracy and if anything Nicholas tried to tighten his control during the First World War which was a disaster for the Russian people. Thanks for the intelligent reply.

  • Russia was wayyy too large of a country for one man to rule it all.

  • Excellent film footage!

  • @aiban14...That would be cite...as opposed to site. Produced by Ivano Idea.

  • wow, xtiml, is that some kind of very dark joke or do you believe that tale? sounds a little bit like nazi paranoia.

  • Can you tell me the producer of this video so I can site it for a project?

  • @aiban14 it's the 17th episode from the B.B.C 1964 documentary "the great war"

  • so was the provisional government a form of democracy????

  • holy crap 5-8 million soldiers dead :S

  • hahaha those imperialists are completly outnumberd there countrey was nearly collapsed stupid of them to face both the germans and the red army.

  • 1917: A trainload of Jews from Brooklyn carrying $40 million in gold bullion steamed across Europe and wound up occupying 363 of the 388 seats in the new Bolshevik assembly after these humanitarian Jewish revolutionaries cut up the czar and his family into little pieces and burned them. You may not have noticed, but these are the people in charge of the United States now.

  • Awesome job on this presentation. Thanks for posting.

  • @RussainCommunist Oh hell it worked for darn near 70 years. I can think of shit loads of governments that didn't last near as long. Beside it was a state powerful enough to make america shit its pants, not a mean feat if you think about it.

  • @RussainCommunist i think the communism that karl marx imagined was supposed to take root in industrialized countries. but in real life it only took birth in preindustrial states: russia, china, cuba, vietnam, korea.

  • @avalsonline I gotta give you credit for you ingenious comments dude, well said.

  • the Tsar blew it.

  • @Rico8458 He did. By his intrest only in the Russian empire itself and not enough care for the people living there, he totally blew it. Fucking Tsar! Go Lenin!

  • while under the tzar, the democracy was really neutered. sure, the 17% of the population could vote for the duma. but the tzar could easily dismiss them at his pleasure, which he did, twice. after the tzar abdicated the throne, the provisional government established more civil rights, but failed to solve the food and fuel shortages as well as World War I. In fact, by choosing to continue to fight the War , the provisional government quickened its own demise. Was the democracy ever effective?

  • this helped me so much to pass my exam it not funny! so thanks

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more