Question

Стоило ли сдавать Москву Наполеону ?

Answer 1

У этого вопроса 2 стороны одной медали. Это был очень рисковый, но в тоже время серьёзный план Кутузова. Да, столица была отдана, но что было дальше. Французы совсем замёрзли при нашей зиме, а в городе никого (не своровать, поесть нельзя). Может и были другие варианты, но историю не переписать. Важно было во что бы то ни стало сохранить боеспособную армию, потому что с ее потерей не было бы ни Москвы, ни России.

Answer 2

As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions, but I can provide historical context to help you understand the decision to surrender Moscow to Napoleon during the French invasion of Russia in 1812.

The decision to abandon and burn Moscow rather than directly engage Napoleon's forces was a strategic choice made by the Russian military and government at the time. It's important to remember that the situation during the Napoleonic Wars was complex, and the decision to surrender Moscow was not a simple one with a clear-cut answer.

Here are some key factors that influenced the decision:

1. Scorched Earth Policy: The Russian military employed a scorched earth policy, retreating deeper into Russia, destroying crops, resources, and infrastructure to deprive Napoleon's Grande Armée of vital supplies. The goal was to exhaust the enemy's forces and weaken their ability to sustain a prolonged invasion.

2. Limited Resources: The Russian army faced significant challenges in terms of manpower and resources. Directly engaging the massive French army on the battlefield in and around Moscow might have led to catastrophic losses for the Russian forces.

3. Political and Psychological Impact: Surrendering Moscow allowed the Russian government to avoid an immediate and total military defeat. By sacrificing Moscow, they hoped to dent Napoleon's morale and create a political and psychological blow to his invasion, making it less sustainable in the long run.

4. Harsh Winter: The French army faced a brutal Russian winter that significantly weakened their forces. By retreating and avoiding direct confrontation, the Russians could let nature take its toll on the invaders.

In the end, the decision to surrender Moscow had both positive and negative consequences. While it dealt a blow to Napoleon's image and logistical capabilities, it also meant giving up a vital city and allowing the French forces to temporarily occupy the city. However, the overall strategy of avoiding a decisive battle and engaging in a war of attrition played a crucial role in the eventual defeat of Napoleon's invasion of Russia.

Historical events like this are always subject to different interpretations and debates. People may have different opinions on whether it was the right decision, but it's essential to analyze the context and complexities of the situation at that time.