A couple of months ago a document was found in American military intelligence archives, which was lying there for 65 years and didn't arise any interest until the present day.
US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128which was dubbed “Red House Report” by the British media, was prepared by a French agent. This is a detailed report about the secret meeting, which took place at the Maison Rouge Hotel (“Red House”) in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. According to this document, Nazi high command invited the elite group of German industrialists in order to plan the postwar recovery of Germany, to prepare everything to bring the Nazis back to power and to create a “strong German empire” — in other word, the Fourth Reich.
Three-page closely typed report marked “Secret” was copied for British authorities and air-mailed to Cordell Hull, U. S. Secretary of State. This report contains a detailed description of methods, which Nazis together with German industrialists were willing to use in order to re-build the German economy, e.g. transferring money through Switzerland. Later on they were going to wait for the right moment and seize the power in Germany once again.
There were representatives of such companies as Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt among the gathered industrialists. Top officials of the fleet and the Armament ministry were also present at this meeting. With a remarkable foresight they decided that the Fourth Reich should be an economic empire, rather than the military one — but this time it wasn't supposed to be solely German.
The ideas brought to life at this meeting seem quite alike to those that formed the basis of the European integration at the end of 1940-s. History often gives us ridiculous lessons, doesn't it?
http://www.win.ru/en/school/2450.phtml
Showing posts with label WWII. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WWII. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Sunday, May 30, 2010
The world that changed after 1945
In his book book "Lend Lease: Weapon for Victory" E. Stettinius conceived the following grounds of the after-war world and the peaceful U. S policy in it: "When we were not the United Nations and everyone was by himself, all we had were the misfortunes and defeats. Having become the United Nations, we’ve intercepted the enemy’s initiative and now we are winning. It doesn’t matter, how many months of struggle are ahead — until we’re together the day is undoubtedly ours.
What will we be capable of since we reach this victory — that depends from whether we’d be able to conclude peace the same way we’ve fought against the aggression, remaining to be the United Nations. For the last 30 months, since 11th of March, 1941 we’ve received plenty of evidences that our unity can work the miracles. We’ve avoided the catastrophe, which could’ve postponed the liberation for centuries and we’ve gained a great opportunity to achieve the better future for the humanity. We’d only be able to use this opportunity if we stay united.
One might ask why the matter of the possibility of our future cooperation is being raised at all. If we won thanks to our unity, it would be a terrible mockery if we’d suffer a defeat during the peace time, having failed to keep our unity! Then all our losses, all the sacrifices made by those who lived and fought for the victory, would be really in vain.
But if we’ve learned how to fight back-to-back, we still might learn how to cooperate after the war. Of course we’ll face difficulties, contradictions and conflicts of interests. But there’s really nothing new or incredibly awful in it. Such matters can be solved to the mutual benefit. I think that those Americans who doubt that — and that is very odd in my opinion — do not have the faith in our ability to use our power wisely and for the common good in the international relations.
What are we to be afraid of? Rivalry with the Great Britain? We’ll hope that it would be a fair competition — competition in fight for prosperity of our own and all the other countries. After the victory in this war our country can hardly be afraid of any competition. We would have the tremendous material resources and the industrial power at our disposal as the country that didn’t suffer from the enemy attacks, country whose citizens can make business with people all over the world, country that know a lot about the life of other nations thanks to the millions of our compatriots living abroad. The English fear of competition can be understandable as they’ve suffered heavy economic and military losses. However, Englishmen are great businessmen as well and they would find the strength to restore their economy and we are interested in them to succeed at that. Great economic prospects are opening up before everyone who lives in a free and prospering world.
"Are we afraid of the communism in Russia? Why on earth do we have to be afraid of it? Do we have so little faith in our form of leadership and don’t we understand how much good did the free entrepreneurship, regulated for the sake of democracy, brought to our country? We have been working on our experiment for more than 150 years already — and we will keep walking our way, so the Soviets are free to work at their own experiment. We don’t have a single reason to be afraid of Russia. We’d just benefit from the friendship and the mutually profitable cooperation with it".
Are we afraid of the revival of China? Of course, not. China has been the most peaceful of all the great nations for the last 2000 years. New China can be considered to be the moral leader of the United Nations in the sense of understanding of what should we do for the sake of establishing the international cooperation.
After concluding the peace, Americans would have nothing to be afraid of, except, probably, the lack of faith in themselves and their own country. If we’re ready to continue our wartime cooperation even during the peace time, the rest of the world will be glad to cooperate with us for the sake of the common benefit.
All the United Nations have subscribed to the goals, proclaimed in the Atlantic Charter and the Declaration of the United Nations that can be briefly formulated as the freedom of speech, religious freedom, and freedom from poverty and fear. We cannot reach these goals at once — the path that leads to them is long and thorny, but they are still as much worthy and real as the goals of our Declaration of Independence. We cannot reach the strong and lasting peace without reaching them. History of humanity gives us the evidence that peace and prosperity are incompatible with the tyranny, poverty and fear".
The article I link here goes further and offers possible scenarios of USSR development after the victory in the Second World war.
http://www.win.ru/en/Mysteries-of-History/3331.phtml
What will we be capable of since we reach this victory — that depends from whether we’d be able to conclude peace the same way we’ve fought against the aggression, remaining to be the United Nations. For the last 30 months, since 11th of March, 1941 we’ve received plenty of evidences that our unity can work the miracles. We’ve avoided the catastrophe, which could’ve postponed the liberation for centuries and we’ve gained a great opportunity to achieve the better future for the humanity. We’d only be able to use this opportunity if we stay united.
One might ask why the matter of the possibility of our future cooperation is being raised at all. If we won thanks to our unity, it would be a terrible mockery if we’d suffer a defeat during the peace time, having failed to keep our unity! Then all our losses, all the sacrifices made by those who lived and fought for the victory, would be really in vain.
But if we’ve learned how to fight back-to-back, we still might learn how to cooperate after the war. Of course we’ll face difficulties, contradictions and conflicts of interests. But there’s really nothing new or incredibly awful in it. Such matters can be solved to the mutual benefit. I think that those Americans who doubt that — and that is very odd in my opinion — do not have the faith in our ability to use our power wisely and for the common good in the international relations.
What are we to be afraid of? Rivalry with the Great Britain? We’ll hope that it would be a fair competition — competition in fight for prosperity of our own and all the other countries. After the victory in this war our country can hardly be afraid of any competition. We would have the tremendous material resources and the industrial power at our disposal as the country that didn’t suffer from the enemy attacks, country whose citizens can make business with people all over the world, country that know a lot about the life of other nations thanks to the millions of our compatriots living abroad. The English fear of competition can be understandable as they’ve suffered heavy economic and military losses. However, Englishmen are great businessmen as well and they would find the strength to restore their economy and we are interested in them to succeed at that. Great economic prospects are opening up before everyone who lives in a free and prospering world.
"Are we afraid of the communism in Russia? Why on earth do we have to be afraid of it? Do we have so little faith in our form of leadership and don’t we understand how much good did the free entrepreneurship, regulated for the sake of democracy, brought to our country? We have been working on our experiment for more than 150 years already — and we will keep walking our way, so the Soviets are free to work at their own experiment. We don’t have a single reason to be afraid of Russia. We’d just benefit from the friendship and the mutually profitable cooperation with it".
Are we afraid of the revival of China? Of course, not. China has been the most peaceful of all the great nations for the last 2000 years. New China can be considered to be the moral leader of the United Nations in the sense of understanding of what should we do for the sake of establishing the international cooperation.
After concluding the peace, Americans would have nothing to be afraid of, except, probably, the lack of faith in themselves and their own country. If we’re ready to continue our wartime cooperation even during the peace time, the rest of the world will be glad to cooperate with us for the sake of the common benefit.
All the United Nations have subscribed to the goals, proclaimed in the Atlantic Charter and the Declaration of the United Nations that can be briefly formulated as the freedom of speech, religious freedom, and freedom from poverty and fear. We cannot reach these goals at once — the path that leads to them is long and thorny, but they are still as much worthy and real as the goals of our Declaration of Independence. We cannot reach the strong and lasting peace without reaching them. History of humanity gives us the evidence that peace and prosperity are incompatible with the tyranny, poverty and fear".
The article I link here goes further and offers possible scenarios of USSR development after the victory in the Second World war.
http://www.win.ru/en/Mysteries-of-History/3331.phtml
Friday, May 28, 2010
MILLION REICHSMARKS FOR ROOSEVELT’S ASSASSINATION
In summer 2008 Toronto University employee PhD Ivan Kachanovsky published sensational information from the Franklin Roosevelt archives. According to it, in 1941-42 FBI agents, U. S. Presidential Intelligence Service and the U. S. Presidential Security Service were seeking for the OUN agents, sent to the USA by the Third Reich.
According to the data, obtained by American special services — including the information from their informants at the pro-fascist organizations of the Eastern Europe — press attaché of the German embassy in Argentina (certain Zinser) has organized a group of the Ukrainian terrorists who were charged with a mission to kill the U. S. President F. Roosevelt. One million Reichsmarks were promised for this order. Gregory Matseyko headed the group — in 1934 he murdered Bronislav Pieracky, Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs due to the Bandera’s order. Nicolay Lebed and Darya Gnatkovskaya — convicted by the Polish court for the same crime and later liberated from the Polish prison by the Germans — also were the members of the terrorist group.
See the whole text of the article, which is rather interesting to follow, on http://www.win.ru/en/win/3609.phtml
According to the data, obtained by American special services — including the information from their informants at the pro-fascist organizations of the Eastern Europe — press attaché of the German embassy in Argentina (certain Zinser) has organized a group of the Ukrainian terrorists who were charged with a mission to kill the U. S. President F. Roosevelt. One million Reichsmarks were promised for this order. Gregory Matseyko headed the group — in 1934 he murdered Bronislav Pieracky, Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs due to the Bandera’s order. Nicolay Lebed and Darya Gnatkovskaya — convicted by the Polish court for the same crime and later liberated from the Polish prison by the Germans — also were the members of the terrorist group.
See the whole text of the article, which is rather interesting to follow, on http://www.win.ru/en/win/3609.phtml
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
ALTERNATIVE HISTORY OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR
Alternative historical scenarios allow us to better understand the specific decisions that various politicians have made in the real history. Any head of state, while making a decision, approximate, in one way or another, the possible future in case of both fulfilling the appointed decision and its cancellation. Today’s reconstruction of the virtual past leads us to better understanding of the historical persons’ motivation and lets us estimate how justified their decisions had been. Long story short, alternative historical scenarios give the opportunity to estimate the lost prospects or, on the contrary, dangers for the state that were avoided (in our case we’re talking of the second variant). The question — whether the world would have turned to worse or to better — if at some given moment the course of history was different — is not vain at all. Its solution is vitally important for giving the appraisal estimates to the events of the past.
As far back as in September of 1938 Winston Churchill, then First Lord of Admiralty (naval minister) of Great Britain, put the question of mining the Norwegian coastal waters in order to bar Germany from exporting the iron ore via the Norwegian seaport Narwik to the agenda of Her Majesty’s Cabinet. In December of 1939 Churchill unambiguously supported the idea of preventive occupation of Norway. The USSR was fighting the war against Finland at the time and the plans of English presence in the North of Europe started to acquire the shape of the clearly anti-Soviet kind. In the same report dated the 16th of December, 1939 Churchill unequivocally pointed out the probability of starting the warfare against the Soviet Union: "Transfer of the iron ore from Luleo (Baltic Sea) has already stopped because of the ice and we can’t let the Soviet icebreakers to crush it in case if they try"...
http://www.win.ru/en/Mysteries-of-History/4113.phtml
As far back as in September of 1938 Winston Churchill, then First Lord of Admiralty (naval minister) of Great Britain, put the question of mining the Norwegian coastal waters in order to bar Germany from exporting the iron ore via the Norwegian seaport Narwik to the agenda of Her Majesty’s Cabinet. In December of 1939 Churchill unambiguously supported the idea of preventive occupation of Norway. The USSR was fighting the war against Finland at the time and the plans of English presence in the North of Europe started to acquire the shape of the clearly anti-Soviet kind. In the same report dated the 16th of December, 1939 Churchill unequivocally pointed out the probability of starting the warfare against the Soviet Union: "Transfer of the iron ore from Luleo (Baltic Sea) has already stopped because of the ice and we can’t let the Soviet icebreakers to crush it in case if they try"...
http://www.win.ru/en/Mysteries-of-History/4113.phtml
Nazi henchmen from Scandinavia dreamed of colonizing Russia and the Ukraine
Scandinavia was to play a special role in the worldview of the German national-socialistы. That was both a cradle of the "Nordic race" and the motherhood for the nations that were related to Germans. Even prior to that, in the beginning of the 20th century, pan-Germanists were laying great hopes for Scandinavia, considering it to be natural for the Northern Europe to be reunited under the auspice of Germany. During the Second World War real opportunity to check both "pan-Germanist" and "Nordic" theories appeared. Thus, to the utmost surprise of the Nazis, it turned out that the "related nations" — the "Vikings" — weren’t much enthusiastic about becoming a part of the Great German Reich.
With the beginning of the Second World War, Scandinavian countries strove to keep their neutrality just like they did during the First World War. Denmark and Norway have failed at that, though. These countries have suddenly fetched themselves under the intent attention of the warring parties, which were attempting to improve their strategic positions for their account. Germans have slightly outstripped Englishmen at that. At that point, Norway — that was initially protesting against the English disregard for its neutrality — had nothing else to do, rather than to beg England of help. But in 1940 British people were unable (or unwilling) to protect Norway, and Germany has consolidated its grip of the Northern Europe.
In Denmark and Norway the population wasn’t showing any specific willingness to participate in the military affairs of the German national-socialism. Yes, the occupational regime in these countries was rather gentle. It cannot by no means be compared with the Nazi regimes at the occupied territories not only of Poland and the USSR, but even with that of France and (by the end of the war) Italy. In a great many senses occupants were relying on the local powers very much. In Denmark most part of Danish administration, police and legal justice bodies was intact — the laws of the Danish Kingdom were still in use there. Similar situation emerged in Norway. It also formally remained to be autonomous; it had its own government, police and judicial bodies. At that, even before the invasion to Norway, Nazi had a strong "fifth column" — the "Nasjonal Samling Party" headed by Vidkun Quisling — in that country. In February of 1942 occupants have appointed Quisling to be the head of the puppet government of Norway. We should say that during the years of the Second World War the very word "quisling" became a common noun denoting the puppet collaborationist, willing to execute any German order. French "Vichy government members", Croatian Ustaša and Slovakian supporters of the pro-fascist regime were dubbed this way.
http://www.win.ru/en/Mysteries-of-History/4200.phtml
With the beginning of the Second World War, Scandinavian countries strove to keep their neutrality just like they did during the First World War. Denmark and Norway have failed at that, though. These countries have suddenly fetched themselves under the intent attention of the warring parties, which were attempting to improve their strategic positions for their account. Germans have slightly outstripped Englishmen at that. At that point, Norway — that was initially protesting against the English disregard for its neutrality — had nothing else to do, rather than to beg England of help. But in 1940 British people were unable (or unwilling) to protect Norway, and Germany has consolidated its grip of the Northern Europe.
In Denmark and Norway the population wasn’t showing any specific willingness to participate in the military affairs of the German national-socialism. Yes, the occupational regime in these countries was rather gentle. It cannot by no means be compared with the Nazi regimes at the occupied territories not only of Poland and the USSR, but even with that of France and (by the end of the war) Italy. In a great many senses occupants were relying on the local powers very much. In Denmark most part of Danish administration, police and legal justice bodies was intact — the laws of the Danish Kingdom were still in use there. Similar situation emerged in Norway. It also formally remained to be autonomous; it had its own government, police and judicial bodies. At that, even before the invasion to Norway, Nazi had a strong "fifth column" — the "Nasjonal Samling Party" headed by Vidkun Quisling — in that country. In February of 1942 occupants have appointed Quisling to be the head of the puppet government of Norway. We should say that during the years of the Second World War the very word "quisling" became a common noun denoting the puppet collaborationist, willing to execute any German order. French "Vichy government members", Croatian Ustaša and Slovakian supporters of the pro-fascist regime were dubbed this way.
http://www.win.ru/en/Mysteries-of-History/4200.phtml
Monday, May 24, 2010
Why did the West lose the Second World War?
A lot of Russians believe that we’re living in the age of the Western triumph. West surrounds us everywhere. It reigns over the popular car models and at the labels of trendy clothes; it is in the photographs of pop-idols and political brands. In both literal and figurative senses, we’re dancing to the Western music. Who might doubt the triumph of the prevailed civilization?
This, however, is a provincial view from Himki or Odoevo1. This is a view of people who lived through crush of the "iron curtain" and literally lost their steps due to an avalanche of the forbidden goods that rushed from over the burst-through dam. Being in a panic we are even ready to claim the banal market relations to be the "Western achievement" though the market existed as far back as in the times of ancient Sumerians or Siam, thousands of years before the Wall Street.
At the very same time American ideologist Patrick Buchanan is writing a book named "Death of the West". Startling name was given not for the sake of an ad sensation. There’s a sincere anxiety of an American patriot not only for his country but for the whole Euro-Atlantic civilization in every single line.
http://www.win.ru/en/ideas/4294.phtml
This, however, is a provincial view from Himki or Odoevo1. This is a view of people who lived through crush of the "iron curtain" and literally lost their steps due to an avalanche of the forbidden goods that rushed from over the burst-through dam. Being in a panic we are even ready to claim the banal market relations to be the "Western achievement" though the market existed as far back as in the times of ancient Sumerians or Siam, thousands of years before the Wall Street.
At the very same time American ideologist Patrick Buchanan is writing a book named "Death of the West". Startling name was given not for the sake of an ad sensation. There’s a sincere anxiety of an American patriot not only for his country but for the whole Euro-Atlantic civilization in every single line.
http://www.win.ru/en/ideas/4294.phtml
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)