|
Post by JustJohn or JJ on Feb 5, 2019 11:28:59 GMT -7
On February 4th in 1945, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt joined British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin at a conference in Yalta where they decided how Europe will look like after WW2.
This is not to far from the truth.
|
|
|
Post by karl on Feb 5, 2019 11:50:10 GMT -7
International politects at work.
Karl
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2019 7:45:12 GMT -7
FDR was more concerned with how he would appear in "American" history and not "World" history. If he could have fought JUST the Japanese without the rest of the Axis powers, he would have done so. He needed Stalin to help fight Japan in China and Asia, otherwise he would never had given him any assistance. FDR didn't care about Europe and would've given the entire Continent to Stalin if needed. If it hadn't been for Churchill, Communism would've moved further west than just 1/2 of Germany.
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Mar 15, 2019 5:27:37 GMT -7
+++ FDR didn't care about Europe and would've given the entire Continent to Stalin if needed. +++
maybe except Great Britain. He would not give them to Russia. FDR was almost dying, on his last feet and did not care nor known enough about the complicated history of Europe.
Victors write the history!
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Mar 15, 2019 6:04:13 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Mar 15, 2019 6:14:13 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 15, 2019 15:01:40 GMT -7
+++ FDR didn't care about Europe and would've given the entire Continent to Stalin if needed. +++ maybe except Great Britain. He would not give them to Russia. FDR was almost dying, on his last feet and did not care nor known enough about the complicated history of Europe. Victors write the history! What more was to be done? Take the remnants from the German army and turn everyone against the Bolsheviks and push them back into the Soviet Union? At what cost? And would it have at all been possible? Would the exhausted people of Europe and the destroyed economies supported such a course? No, of course not. So it comes down to horse trading, and we got the deal we got. Churchill lived long enough to present his revision of history in his masterful English. FDR did not. It appears Stalin got about all he could hope for, and the allies did not come out too badly, as from the American perspective European history consists of England, France, that Barbaric Nation beyond France that goes to war every 20 years, and beyond that is Terra Incognita. Sadly that covers our parts of Central and Eastern Europe. We, the west DID invade Russia in 1919 at the close of WW1 and gained nothing for it except additional dead and the eternal enmity of Russia as 'Just another Invader, definitely NOT to be trusted." So you say we should have repeated that action? Oops... go back to paragraph one. Oh, and another example of the West and its demonstrated Follow Through, we have the 1956 Hungarian Uprising, which was fomented and encouraged by Radio Free Europe, that propaganda and news arm of the "Free West". When the Hungarians established their independence we failed then to follow through and come in with our armies and our support to keep the Soviets from returning. We should note that the leader of the Free World at that time was one of the most respected generals of WW 2, Dwight Eisenhower. He was likely to have a good measure of the damage and mayhem such an action would cost in blood and treasure. Now then for all the arm chair warriors, we have the more recent incident at Srebrenica where in July 1995 a UN battalion watched on, outgunned and outnumbered, not willing to sacrifice their lives, as 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered in a Bosnian town. Should we go back and rewrite these incidents in history? In whose blood? Go back to the books, class, my crystal ball is cloudy. Kai
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Mar 15, 2019 20:58:44 GMT -7
I agree that we have to look at the history from the position of people who lived there, still, Roosevelt did not show his understanding of the perspective... and he was blinded by Stalin and this was not good for Poland. +++ FDR didn't care about Europe and would've given the entire Continent to Stalin if needed. +++ maybe except Great Britain. He would not give them to Russia. FDR was almost dying, on his last feet and did not care nor known enough about the complicated history of Europe. Victors write the history! What more was to be done? Take the remnants from the German army and turn everyone against the Bolsheviks and push them back into the Soviet Union? At what cost? And would it have at all been possible? Would the exhausted people of Europe and the destroyed economies supported such a course? No, of course not. So it comes down to horse trading, and we got the deal we got. Churchill lived long enough to present his revision of history in his masterful English. FDR did not. It appears Stalin got about all he could hope for, and the allies did not come out too badly, as from the American perspective European history consists of England, France, that Barbaric Nation beyond France that goes to war every 20 years, and beyond that is Terra Incognita. Sadly that covers our parts of Central and Eastern Europe. We, the west DID invade Russia in 1919 at the close of WW1 and gained nothing for it except additional dead and the eternal enmity of Russia as 'Just another Invader, definitely NOT to be trusted." So you say we should have repeated that action? Oops... go back to paragraph one. Oh, and another example of the West and its demonstrated Follow Through, we have the 1956 Hungarian Uprising, which was fomented and encouraged by Radio Free Europe, that propaganda and news arm of the "Free West". When the Hungarians established their independence we failed then to follow through and come in with our armies and our support to keep the Soviets from returning. We should note that the leader of the Free World at that time was one of the most respected generals of WW 2, Dwight Eisenhower. He was likely to have a good measure of the damage and mayhem such an action would cost in blood and treasure. Now then for all the arm chair warriors, we have the more recent incident at Srebrenica where in July 1995 a UN battalion watched on, outgunned and outnumbered, not willing to sacrifice their lives, as 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered in a Bosnian town. Should we go back and rewrite these incidents in history? In whose blood? Go back to the books, class, my crystal ball is cloudy. Kai
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 17, 2019 12:45:30 GMT -7
POLAND:
VII. POLAND The following declaration on Poland was agreed by the conference:
"A new situation has been created in Poland as a result of her complete liberation by the Red Army. This calls for the establishment of a Polish Provisional Government which can be more broadly based than was possible before the recent liberation of the western part of Poland. The Provisional Government which is now functioning in Poland should therefore be reorganized on a broader democratic basis with the inclusion of democratic leaders from Poland itself and from Poles abroad. This new Government should then be called the Polish Provisional Government of National Unity.
"M. Molotov, Mr. Harriman and Sir A. Clark Kerr are authorized as a commission to consult in the first instance in Moscow with members of the present Provisional Government and with other Polish democratic leaders from within Poland and from abroad, with a view to the reorganization of the present Government along the above lines. This Polish Provisional Government of National Unity shall be pledged to the holding of free and unfettered elections as soon as possible on the basis of universal suffrage and secret ballot. In these elections all democratic and anti-Nazi parties shall have the right to take part and to put forward candidates.
"When a Polish Provisional of Government National Unity has been properly formed in conformity with the above, the Government of the U.S.S.R., which now maintains diplomatic relations with the present Provisional Government of Poland, and the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government of the United States of America will establish diplomatic relations with the new Polish Provisional Government National Unity, and will exchange Ambassadors by whose reports the respective Governments will be kept informed about the situation in Poland.
"The three heads of Government consider that the eastern frontier of Poland should follow the Curzon Line with digressions from it in some regions of five to eight kilometers in favor of Poland. They recognize that Poland must receive substantial accessions in territory in the north and west. They feel that the opinion of the new Polish Provisional Government of National Unity should be sought in due course of the extent of these accessions and that the final delimitation of the western frontier of Poland should thereafter await the peace conference."
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 17, 2019 12:46:54 GMT -7
GERMANY: III. DISMEMBERMENT OF GERMANY It was agreed that Article 12 (a) of the Surrender terms for Germany should be amended to read as follows: "The United Kingdom, the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics shall possess supreme authority with respect to Germany. In the exercise of such authority they will take such steps, including the complete dismemberment of Germany as they deem requisite for future peace and security." The study of the procedure of the dismemberment of Germany was referred to a committee consisting of Mr. Anthony Eden, Mr. John Winant, and Mr. Fedor T. Gusev. This body would consider the desirability of associating with it a French representative. IV. ZONE OF OCCUPATION FOR THE FRENCH AND CONTROL COUNCIL FOR GERMANY. It was agreed that a zone in Germany, to be occupied by the French forces, should be allocated France. This zone would be formed out of the British and American zones and its extent would be settled by the British and Americans in consultation with the French Provisional Government. It was also agreed that the French Provisional Government should be invited to become a member of the Allied Control Council for Germany. V. REPARATION The following protocol has been approved: Protocol On the Talks Between the Heads of Three Governments at the Crimean Conference on the Question of the German Reparations in Kind 1. Germany must pay in kind for the losses caused by her to the Allied nations in the course of the war. Reparations are to be received in the first instance by those countries which have borne the main burden of the war, have suffered the heaviest losses and have organized victory over the enemy. 2. Reparation in kind is to be exacted from Germany in three following forms: (a) Removals within two years from the surrender of Germany or the cessation of organized resistance from the national wealth of Germany located on the territory of Germany herself as well as outside her territory (equipment, machine tools, ships, rolling stock, German investments abroad, shares of industrial, transport and other enterprises in Germany, etc.), these removals to be carried out chiefly for the purpose of destroying the war potential of Germany. (b) Annual deliveries of goods from current production for a period to be fixed. (c) Use of German labor. 3. For the working out on the above principles of a detailed plan for exaction of reparation from Germany an Allied reparation commission will be set up in Moscow. It will consist of three representatives - one from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, one from the United Kingdom and one from the United States of America. 4. With regard to the fixing of the total sum of the reparation as well as the distribution of it among the countries which suffered from the German aggression, the Soviet and American delegations agreed as follows: "The Moscow reparation commission should take in its initial studies as a basis for discussion the suggestion of the Soviet Government that the total sum of the reparation in accordance with the points (a) and (b) of the Paragraph 2 should be 22 billion dollars and that 50 per cent should go to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics." The British delegation was of the opinion that, pending consideration of the reparation question by the Moscow reparation commission, no figures of reparation should be mentioned. The above Soviet-American proposal has been passed to the Moscow reparation commission as one of the proposals to be considered by the commission. VI. MAJOR WAR CRIMINALS avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/yalta.asp
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 17, 2019 12:51:22 GMT -7
No mention of rape or pillage in anything of the agreement, nor responsibility of one government to police the army of the other, and I suppose no provisions forbidding revenge upon Germany for atrocities committed in the previous few years, and revenge is a strong motivator. Karl, reading the tone and inconsistencies of your reference I must rate it as propaganda that was spread well after the war. That is not to deny truths contained within that propaganda, but propaganda all the same. Much as the USA is being subjected to anti-Muslim propaganda by Trump today, inciting to violence rather than peace.
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 17, 2019 12:54:22 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by karl on Mar 17, 2019 16:17:45 GMT -7
Kai
Thank you for your assessment of the post in question. In this matter, we do have an opposite view, but I will delete it out as unsuitable for the forum.
Karl
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Mar 17, 2019 17:37:13 GMT -7
Kai Thank you for your assessment of the post in question. In this matter, we do have an opposite view, but I will delete it out as unsuitable for the forum. Karl Yes, I suppose Jaga will also not be happy with my views, but happily we get to express them openly, all sides. It is interesting to hear Roosevelt called naive working with Stalin. Mostly I have run across that with people who admire Churchill, but as I stated, Churchill was a great master of the English language and lived to write his version of history. I am also not happy with the results of the war and the separation of my family and the ill effects of communist dictatorship oppressing so many people for over 40 years, but that is how it was. How nice it is now with the freedom of travel and expression! Then again, look at our tilt back toward authoritarianism and hate today. Not nice, not nice outlooks for the future. As to war, it is nasty business and too popular in our world, particularly speaking of the USA today. Today to question any of our wars is to be unpatriotic, but then some of us are not proud that soldiers loose their legs and their lives for "Optional Wars", that we don't bother to count lost civilian lives in the conflicts, and we are too quick to gloss over the long term suffering of the nations of peoples who are dragged into these wars of greed or ideology. As for what I call German exile propaganda, yes, I believe it exists and has been perpetuated over the decades by the Mannschaften, Sudeten groups and such. It is the specific terminology used, the repeated bloody details and examples given that distinguish it. Yes they were driven out and suffered, and suffered atrocities. But the land, let us use Prussia as an example, was won by the sword and lost by the sword. The original Prussians were exterminated and the New-Prussians (Germans) claim the sympathy today. As for rape and pillage, it belongs to war. Men get to die and be dismembered, women get to die and be raped. Generally children and babies only get to die. War is Hell, always was, will not change. I have to agree with the Vienna War Museum (Kriegesmuseum): war belongs in the museum. Kai
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Mar 17, 2019 21:21:08 GMT -7
Kai and Karl,
there were books written by Polish Americans about how FDR betrayed Poland and I agree... I understand that everybody has its own perspective and that FDR helped to get through the economical crisis and he was almost dead. Still Poles were extremely disappointed by a lack of help in reaction to German invasion in 1939 and later a lack of help for Poland after the war. Churchill had better instincts and he understood the politics of Europe better. He also was dealing with Polish London government during WW II.
|
|