Russian Civil War thread

This is realy interesting, because as i understand it, most Russians see Whites as good guys until the main White forces got defeated (Kolchak) After that, Reds are seen as protectors of Russia against foreign imperialism. (This was also motivation for a lot of people to join Red army in late war). People that tried to film documentary about Czechoslovak legionaries had a lot of problems with local population because our soldiers were considered foreign imperialists by local population.

No realy, brutality of Whites was thing that lost them a war. In General Gajda´s memories you can read about hate toward Reds in 1917 and 1918 and "love" toward Whites and legionaries, but this changed later Red officers started with terror to punish soldiers for not obeying orders and harassing the population, White general Kornilov said something like "We have to burn half of Russia and spill the blood of 3/4 of population to defeat the Reds". Tji isnt realy a thing that could give you support from people.

What are some good books about the Czechoslovak Legion? Frankly I find their story to be amazing and one of the most fascinating aspects of the entire WW1-WW2 era.

I got this cool picture for this post and then forgot to use it...

You guys should check out Pyotr Wrangel's memoirs that he wrote in Paris before he was assassinated.

Its extremely complicated to find some books in English, i dont even think that there are any. But if you are at least Polish or probably some other Slav, you can try to read Gajda´s memoirs: uloz.to/!AcVjHtrM/gajda-radola-moje-pameti-pdf
Or some of these books: literatura2.topsid.com/index.php?war=odraz_1_sv_valky_v_ceske_a_svetove_literature&unit=legionarska_literatura
If you are looking for a novel not necessarily from former legionare, i recommend you Dalibor Vácha, he wrote 4 books about legionaries, 1 about WW2 Czechoslovak corps in Soviet Union and one post-apo iam reading right now

thanks dubsman

go to google books and type in czech legion. i can't attest to the quality of any of these titles but you can find that out with some investigation

Doubtful. The Whites were revanchist and Russian ultranationalists.

Perhaps if they'd allied with the likes of Kerensky, but could you really see that happening? They hated the Russian Republic as much as they hated the Soviets

Post RCW art/posters

Probably the most iconic one on the Bolshevik side, "Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge"

Trotsky as St George slaying the dragon/serpent of "Counter Revolution"

The whites would have won if:

1.) They weren't whores of foreign powers

2.) They didn't terrorize and purge areas they occupied (see the white terror)

3.) They didn't have monarchists (by 1917 everyone hated the monarchy besides a handful of delusional nobility and clergy)

4.) They were anti-WW1 (the provisional govs continution of the war is what did them in)

5.) they promised land reform

6.) self-determination for nationalities, including emancipation for jews and independence for poland

7.) they have a unified leadership under a central figure

But they were able to do NONE of these things, which is why incredibly the bolsheviks were able to win. That and the Whites were such a shitshow. While they may seem like the "good guys" in the hindsight of the horrors of bolshevism, at the time the bolsheviks enjoyed a far greater level of popularity with than the whites (though they were NOT more popular than the socialist revolutionarities, who were split between both sides, thus dooming them). The bolshevik promise for land reform, an end to WW1, and self-determination were far more appealing than the whites, who were often lumped in with the old regime and its failures

The turning point really came at Brest-Litovsk, which secured the entire west for the bolsheviks while at the same time earning tacit german cooperation. The bolsheviks also enjoyed cooperation with Ataturk, and Ottoman aid was vital in reconquering the Caucuses (and in particular Armenia)

The other turning point was in the summer of 1919 when the whites launched a series of clumsy counter-attacks on different fronts with NO coordination, allowing the bolsheviks to encircle and destroy each formation one by one instead of being assaulted on all fronts simultaneously.

>though they were NOT more popular than the socialist revolutionarities
With the peasantry, no, but the urban industrial workers vastly favoured the Bolsheviks.

>what if we took a mach-hahahahaha...ok, let me try again. so we have all these horses standing around right? and mobility is a huge factor on the Ukrainian steppe..ok so what if we took a horse-drawn carriage and put a fucking MACHINE GUN on the back??? hahaha the peasants are gonna love this

expand on them fellow slav, what did they do?

what's funny about this? horse-drawn maxims were pretty effective in the war. In lieu of roads and automobiles it was the most effective option.

the Russian Civil War was the last great cavalry war. The horse was the most vital weapon after the railroad

this is correct, but Russia was like 70% peasant, 20% urban worker, 10% nobility/clergy

ROMAN UNGERN VON STERNBERG

Took long enough for someone to post this

>you will never be a Baltic German aristocrat, leading a merciless force of multi-ethnic cavalry, hellbent on restoring the Mongol Empire in 1920s Siberia

The whites should have won.

Gloria eterna to the royal russians.

there was also a significant minority (even majority of some places) who were pro-menshevik. the fact of the matter is that in the city and the countryside, a large, sustained, unified and coordinated opposition against the bolsheviks ever materialized; partly cause of red terror, partly because of petty squabbling over matters of doctrine or strategy.