In Germany called to demolish the monument to Soviet soldiers who died under Prokhorovka

13
Attempts to rewrite the history of World War II have been undertaken in the West from the first day of its end. For example, on July 9, 2019, the German “democratic” journalist Sven Felix Kellerhoff, the lead editor of the historical section of Die Welt, broke out in an article calling for the demolition of a monument on Prokhorovsky Field, erected in memory of those killed in the battle in July 1943.



It should be noted that on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Victory, in 1995, at the scene of the battle near Prokhorovka, the Belfry and the Church of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul were opened. They are united in a museum reserve. The battle of Prokhorovka went down in world history as the largest with the use of armored vehicles. More than 600 tanks and self-propelled guns took part in the battle from the Soviet side, and about 500 from the German side.

So, the mentioned German journalist claims that there was no major battle at all near Prokhorovka, so there was a minor clash, therefore, the Red Army did not win any victory. As evidence, the journalist cites the “research” of the German military historian, retired colonel of the Bundeswehr, Karl-Heinz Frieser, as well as British explorer Ben Wheatley. The British allegedly discovered in one of the American archives aerial photography of the battlefield near Prokhorovka, made by German aircraft.

In fact, 186 German combat vehicles fought against 672 Soviet ones; in the evening of the same day, losses amounted to about 235 tanks in the Red Army and five in the Wehrmacht.

- the journalist claims.

The journalist described the Red Army’s actions as “a kamikaze attack,” claiming that Soviet tanks “crowded in front of a narrow bridge and became an ideal target for two battalions of the 2nd SS Panzer Corps”.

At the same time, the journalist is modestly silent about whether he has a historical education and whether he served in the army. Not to mention whether he even saw tanks “live” at all, not even 100 at once, one is enough. In addition, he never told what he considered a “major” battle.



It should be added that the Russian historian from the Crimea, Alexander Formanchuk, called the above article by Kellerhoff a monstrous and impudent lie.

A similar article is an act of monstrous, conscious and impudent lies, a perversion of the facts of the Great Patriotic War and, in general, of the Second World War. Unfortunately, in the West, the processes of reviewing the outcome and course of the war are deepening. And this process has reached unprincipled and unscrupulous messages.

- said Formanchuk «РИА Новости».

All these are facts repeatedly spoken by many historians and witnesses. All this has been repeatedly proved, and today we do not need confirmation of these facts and disputes with similar kinds of false journalists. An article in a German newspaper offends the memory of war victims.

- summed up Formanchuk.

And indeed, the battle on the Kursk Bulge, of which the battle of Prokhorovka was a part, had historical significance. It marked a radical change during the war in favor of the USSR, and many in the West do not like it.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

13 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    10 July 2019 12: 53
    I urge everyone with Russophobia to hang themselves!
    1. -3
      14 July 2019 22: 38
      The history of Russia is made up of myths and legends. So - there was no so-called "Battle on the Ice", there was no "Kulikovsky field", there was no victory at Borodino, WW1 was unleashed and lost, WW2 was unleashed and almost lost, there were no "28 Panfilovites", now there was no myth " Prokhorovka "... Well guys ... you will not get bored with you. And how inspired do some people want to “repeat” on Victory Day, what do they want to repeat? 3,5 million prisoners in 3 months or 27 (and according to some sources, all 30 million) million killed in 4 years? And at the same time, for 4 years they won back what the Germans took in half a year, and this despite the fact that the USSR had always had superiority, both in personnel and in weapons.
      Only today the USA and England are on the German side, and there will be no Lend-Lease. Actually, you need to pray for the Amer, but for the British, and Zhukov wanted to move to the English Channel ... that is where they would have buried the whole group of owls. army, for this they had the strength and the means was enough, and the rest of the Wehrmacht would be connected.
      1. +1
        18 July 2019 21: 37
        Myths are created by battered Russian boots like you, because if the Germans had won the battle of Prokhorovka and Ponyry, the Russian troops would have been encircled and the Germans would have been able to take Kursk ... but instead they had to drape to Berlin ... and that’s it, what they did was to snap a bit in the region of Lake Balaton and in the Baltic, but there they were defeated ...
  2. +1
    10 July 2019 12: 57
    Maybe even a monument to German soldiers to put?
  3. +1
    10 July 2019 16: 13
    Whining of a beaten dog.
  4. +1
    11 July 2019 06: 37
    And why was this possible? After all, when our troops were in east Berlin, not a single infection could doubt our victory. And by the way, many of us accepted the withdrawal of troops with enthusiasm. A small lie gives rise to a large one. And no matter where it comes from.
  5. +1
    11 July 2019 13: 10
    About the monument, this, of course, is generally nonsense of some mentally ill person. Many times I saw options for any census of historical events, and from different angles, but I had never seen that on the basis of this I immediately demanded the liquidation of monuments, especially those located abroad ... Anyway, the monument was not to victory, but to people who participated in the battle ...

    The conclusions made by the German journalist or those to whom he refers can indeed be based on photographs of the battlefield near Prokhorovka. There are few of them, but they are, and not only German ones. And there really is a large number of destroyed Soviet tanks and other equipment, and almost no German ones are visible at all. By the way, that is why these photos were never published in the USSR - a very unpleasant picture from a political point of view. But if we discard precisely politics and propaganda, then everyone who really did this, as a historian or a military man, and did not fit the picture in the photo to the "desired version", know why this is exactly the case in the photograph. The Germans had much better repair services than the Red Army, and they also had a sufficient number of "evacuators", ie. special tanks without weapons for towing wrecked vehicles from the battlefield. And it happened right during the battle itself. Unfortunately, there was almost no such practice in Soviet tank units. That is why there are almost no damaged German tanks in the photo, but there are a lot of Soviet ones. Yes, and the losses in armored vehicles, of course, were much higher than the German losses, this is also a fact. For a number of reasons - both technical and the level of training of ITP crews. The fact that exactly the KA definitely won the battle against Prokhorovka has been a controversial topic for many years and for many. But for this, in my opinion, it is necessary to define the term and meaning of the concept of "victory" in general. The battle was huge, the losses were huge on both sides. On the part of the command of the spacecraft, both with the initially better initial data, and with the available superiority of forces, significant blunders were made, and this is also true. But anyway:
    1) the losses received at this stage of the hostilities were more sensitive precisely for the German side than for the USSR, although nominally they (losses) of the Germans in people and equipment were much lower;
    2) the main battlefield itself remained with the Russians;
    3) from a strategic point of view, this was definitely a victory for the SC, since the events near Prokhorovka broke the plan for further actions of the German command in the region;
    4) after the events on the Kursk Bulge, the Germans practically did not carry out major offensive actions on the Eastern Front;
    From my point of view, this is a victory in the military sense. Although at a high price. But the Soviet Union won the whole WWII in the same way ... So you can question the victory in the war ... but the catch will come out: there are too many pictures of the red flag over the Reichstag and autographs of Soviet soldiers are there, but the Kremlin has nothing the Germans did not leave ...
    1. +1
      11 July 2019 15: 44
      The most authoritative researcher of the battle on the Kursk Bulge is V. Zamulin. He has enough books on the subject. Everything is scheduled almost by the hour and involving a huge number of documents.
      As for the monument - I agree with you. The monument is not erected for victory, but put to the soldiers who defended their homeland from the Nazi invaders. And not a German to open his mouth ...
      1. +1
        11 July 2019 16: 42
        I do not know, Zamulina did not read. And he was not specifically or specifically in-depth interested in this topic. I saw some documents and photos, my knowledge in the framework of the general study of tactics and military history + memoirs and other data from both sides. But what I know and with what I’ve got acquainted is quite enough, in my opinion, to create my own impression and general understanding of the situation. In addition, Prokhorovka, as such, and the real consequences of this battle for the parties, can only be considered in a broader strategic context. The battle, in which the participating tanks are considered hundreds, considered separately is simply stupid. Like everything that this German did. He only showed that in history, and (especially) in military affairs, a complete and absolute layman.
        In general, I don’t quite understand why such attention was given to such a fool at all, they are discussing, in my opinion, they say, did the German government apologize? But who knows what kind of Dr. Cancer will write ???
        By the way, we also have enough of these - there is this scientific director of the Military Historical Society (Myagkov, in my opinion), also regularly enough nonsense in the media, and nothing, no one apologizes ...
        1. +1
          11 July 2019 17: 30
          Well, an apology from the government is overkill. I didn’t swear. And of course, no one has the right to demand thorough knowledge of the subject from everyone. General knowledge is enough. I was interested in the topic of war, and I read it. The monument is erected for heroism. The Brest Fortress was surrendered. But nobody has the right to challenge the heroism of the defenders. Under Prokhorovka, the Red Army suffered huge losses. But those who fought and died there are worthy of at least a memory and a monument. And it is not for a German to tell us something. Bogomolov in "Shame imut both the living and the dead" has a phrase:

          I am far from idealizing war at any level and in any period, the victory came at a truly monstrous price, huge, unprecedented blood, however, when they tell me that we fought the wrong way and did the wrong thing, I never make excuses and explain: "We were what we were, but there were no others.

          And since childhood, the poems of Mark Maximov devoted to Moscow militias have sunk into the soul:

          I am equal to you among equals,
          I became a stone, but I live!
          And you, who inherited Moscow
          From fellow citizens
          You who gave me a century
          You are all who will be after us
          Do not forget for an hour
          That I look at you from a stone.
          1. +1
            11 July 2019 17: 43
            In a question about demolition of a monument I do not even want to go deep. I wrote everything. Stupidity is the softest thing to say ...
            I personally am generally against the demolition of monuments. ANYONE. This is our story. Let them stand.
            1. +1
              11 July 2019 18: 19
              PS ... recently, some statements from representatives of those nations that I have always respected with respect - Germans, Japanese, have started to upset me very much. Although historically they were always our opponents, they were strong and worthy opponents. And their analysis of their own successes and failures, too, has always been reasonably reasonable and objective for the most part. But now ... have they been crushed or something? ... or have they degenerated? ... I don’t know. But they bring absolute nonsense the farther, the more often ... And this does not apply at all to Russia and our relations at all .... Actually, that’s all.
  6. 0
    12 July 2019 06: 18
    For such a presentation is not a sin to demolish Germany !!!