Military Review

Inconvenient conclusions from World War II

41
The cynical falsification of the beginning and course of the Second World War by our former Western allies suggests that they want to oblivion the real history and come up with a fake one to justify its anti-Russian policy and break Russia for the sake of the American "new order". As the analyst Lindon LaRouche warns us, about which Zbigniew Brzezinski clicked. In the article "Unlearned lessons of the Second World War" we tried to give, in our opinion, a real background to the course of world events, and now we can draw uncomfortable conclusions.


Inconvenient conclusions from World War II


The West is the West


The American senator and future US president Harry Truman on the 24 of June 1941 of the New York Times either guessed or foresaw the future policies of the USA and allied England in the world war: “If we see that Germany wins the war, we should help Russia if Russia, we should help Germany, and let them kill each other as much as possible. ” He formulated or issued then in an emotional impulse the unchanging credo of American foreign policy.

And today, the United States maintains and deepens the postulate of President Harry Truman in foreign affairs: they create conditions for US opponents or competitors to weaken and kill each other as much as possible. To this end, the United States always helps the weakest to fight, so to speak, for minority rights. Here you need to look for the keys to America’s future actions on the world stage.

The Anglo-Polish military treaty of 25 on August 1939 of the year, ending with the English betrayal of the allied Poland on 3 of September 1939 of the year in the “fake” war with Germany, says that all treaties with England and its successor in the world arena, the USA, are not worth the paper on which they are written. For America, the whole world is the new Indians who can and should be deceived over and over again. Therefore, Russia unsuccessfully seeks to conclude equal treaties with the United States, insisting on the fundamentally impossible for America.

If the United States and conclude a truly equal treaty with Russia, for example, instead of START-3, then only to break it at a convenient time, as England did with Poland. By the way, Hitler also concluded an equal non-aggression pact with the USSR. It is much easier for Russia to agree on equal relations with China and other non-Western countries, therefore Russia goes and will go further to the East, starting from discrimination in relations with the West. In the foreseeable future, Russia is unlikely to succeed in becoming an equal party in relations with the United States and England.

Britain’s exit from the EU, the so-called Brexit, has a strategic goal of rapprochement with America. President Trump promises London a very lucrative bargain, followed by military-political bargains, which worries Berlin and Paris. After that, speaking bluntly, the United States and England can try to unleash a war in Europe in the spirit of the postulate of Harry Truman. To unleash a conflict in Europe, the United States is enough to provoke one of its notorious vassals, the first candidates for provocateurs are, of course, Poland and Bandera Ukraine, it is time to distinguish it from the former Soviet Ukraine.

Ukraine as a “Europe”


The US anti-Russian geopolitical course will remain an obstacle to the establishment of peace in Ukraine and the implementation of the Minsk agreements: Washington will continue to encourage revanchist sentiments of Ukrainian nationalists in the Crimea and Donbass. For the USA, the “new Ukrainians” are new Poles whom it would be good to throw under the feet of Russia, just as England threw the Poles in 1939 under the feet of Nazi Germany. However, Ukrainians will never become completely Poles for Anglo-Americans, because for them Ukrainians are still semi-Russian, therefore their attitude towards them will be worse than towards Poles.

Following the model of British military guarantees to Poland in the 1939 year, the United States together with England can conclude separate military agreements with Poland and Bandera Ukraine in order to push them into provocations to the glory of Anglo-American civilization. By creating a sense of false security.

The implementation of the political part of the Minsk agreements is possible only in the event of the failure of American politics and diplomacy in Ukraine, which is unlikely in the foreseeable future. For this, Russia needs to create such threats to US interests in the world so that they completely forget where Ukraine is located. Although with the help of China, Russia may try to do this. In the 1939 year, there was such a precedent, Churchill said about it: “The fact that such an agreement (German-Soviet non-aggression treaty. - Auth.) Was possible, marks the whole depth of the failure of English and French politics and diplomacy in a few years.”

The Trump Phenomenon


Thanks to the arrival of Donald Trump in the White House of Washington, more precisely, due to the confusion caused by his arrival in the US oligarchic elites, a pause arose in America’s foreign policy, and Russia and the world received a respite. However, how long will it last? President Trump broke the elite consensus in the United States, but, unlike President John F. Kennedy, he was not killed for this and was not even removed from power. How serious is all this, what will be the consequences of Trump’s presidency for the world, if any? The most difficult question today.

Trump’s arrival in America put a similar question on the agenda in Europe: will there be a political figure of the same weight who will try to unite Europe with “iron and blood” in return for the Brussels gay Euro-association? French President Macron and ex-chairman of the EC, but Berlin's protege Jean-Claude Juncker made statements in this sense, but really nothing, as they say, portends. Although theoretically, the emergence of "European Trump" is possible.

It should be noted here that at the end of World War II, already before the obvious defeat of fascist Germany, the USA and England wanted to historically finish Germany off with the Morgenthau plan. US Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau proposed a plan to deprive Germany of industry and turn it into an “agricultural country,” which Europe is doing now in Europe. It seems that only the beginning of the “cold war” between the USA and the USSR prevented Morgenthau’s Anglo-American plan, and the opposite Marshall plan was adopted for Europe: a new confrontation in Europe required the consolidation of Western European countries and turning them into a showcase of US achievements.

Berlin, apparently, remembers the historical plan of Morgenthau and is afraid of new Anglo-American plans, is afraid that German industry wants to finish off with liquefied American gas and still turn Germany into an "agricultural superpower." Therefore, Berlin is so stubbornly building gas "northern streams" with Moscow, despite the rattling of the US sanctions.

And about NATO


The Second World War also showed that achieving collective security in Europe is a mirage, as long as there is England, and today there is also the USA. It follows that all American guarantees to the NATO bloc are fiction, the USA and Brexit England, sailing farther and farther away from Europe, will easily throw all of NATO, just as England easily threw Poland under the fascist ice rink 1 on September 1939 of the year.

Remember Harry Truman's postulate: "... and let them kill each other as much as possible."
Author:
Photos used:
commons.wikimedia.org
Articles from this series:
Unlearned lessons of World War II
The English Beginning of World War II
41 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. rocket757
    rocket757 10 September 2019 15: 06
    +1
    Remember Harry Truman's postulate: "... and let them kill each other as much as possible."

    Someone expects that they will be interested in other than personal interests?
    1. Basil50
      Basil50 10 September 2019 15: 36
      0
      Well, actually from * gentiles * they expected and expect at least observance of decency and nothing more. And then frank lies and frank provocations.
      It is very strange that politics is often confused with intrigue. It is a pity that in Europe observance of elementary decencies was excluded from international relations and they try to exclude from personal relations.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 10 September 2019 17: 20
        -1
        Quote: Vasily50
        It is very strange that politics is often confused with intrigue.

        Oh no!!! It has always been, from the moment a person realized himself, as a unit, society, with his interests!
        And EVERYONE, ALREADY A LOT OF AGES ARE NOT SPEAKING ABOUT GENTLERS!
        The husband does not bear what, they studied history .... but who passed this subject by !!! No luck or all.
    2. Civil
      Civil 11 September 2019 13: 47
      +2
      War is over. After losing in the Cold War, the results were revised. Because they could not remain strong and change the model of society in an evolutionary way. The horror of the transition from socialism back exactly in the 19th century, to feudal capitalism, pushed away all neighbors from Russia.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 11 September 2019 14: 21
        +4
        Quote: Civil
        The horror of the transition from socialism back exactly in the 19th century, to feudal capitalism, pushed away all neighbors from Russia.

        Some did a good job of it, while others clapped their ears or prepared, just wanted this!
        New bar climbed on a very large wealth, which was inherited from the ancestors !!! Used the most cunning, prepared in advance, obviously.
        By the way, cunning elites were in all the former! Not the people dispersed, but divorced them .... the guilt is true ALL !!! they didn’t resist it themselves, they chased after a dream, with sweet promises!
        Everything is as in a textbook, as old as the world .... however, it is not easier on that!
        Now there is nothing to regret, it is necessary to work on the bugs ... it was necessary to start yesterday, and until now we have not mooed, we are not calving!
        It's a shame brother! After all, they lived, were friends, knew, knew how, and now everything is apart ......
  2. Sergey M. Karasev
    Sergey M. Karasev 10 September 2019 15: 23
    0
    The fulfillment of the political part of the Minsk Agreements is possible only in the event of the failure of American politics and diplomacy in Ukraine, which is unlikely in the foreseeable future. For this, Russia needs to create such threats to US interests in the world so that they completely forget where Ukraine is located. Although with the help of China, Russia may try to do this. In the 1939 year, there was such a precedent, Churchill said about it: “The fact that such an agreement (German-Soviet non-aggression treaty. - Auth.) Was possible, marks the whole depth of the failure of English and French politics and diplomacy in a few years.”

    But we remember how this "failure of English and French politics and diplomacy over several years" ended. Such analogies scare me. Only the war with China was not enough for us.
  3. Keyser soze
    Keyser soze 10 September 2019 15: 40
    +6
    Here, either Ukraine or Poland, and at worst, all of NATO. For a change, the Israelis can be added, since every week someone else bombed .... laughing

    So many dushmans crawled up on you that there is no time to clear the radioactive barges or finish the dump in Shies.
  4. Rwmos
    Rwmos 10 September 2019 15: 42
    +7
    The fig is bald. And being a pioneer, he dug up the remains of the bunker. There were two of them. two. All sleeves filled up, and nowhere to go, they understood this ....
    1. Titus
      Titus 10 September 2019 22: 35
      0
      Impressed .... someone was able to see a living example.
      1. Rwmos
        Rwmos 10 September 2019 23: 44
        0
        Brother-ok) "one" ... For that non-stop landing - tell? There it was, with obscenities and a bayonet, the landing party twisted Guderian's horns ... Zaoksk Or the words of my grandmother - oh. beautiful Siberians! Only through our village did the division pass, and I, crying, only dragged the zhvukh - they all died !!!
  5. Chaldon48
    Chaldon48 10 September 2019 15: 47
    0
    The principle "let them kill each other as much as possible" arose especially in relation to Russia long before WWII, even if you do not go too deep into history, it operated both in WWII and in civilian life.
    1. zenion
      zenion 10 September 2019 17: 38
      +2
      You forgot about the Crimean War, when Naglia put together an opposition against Russia. And they did it constantly at any opportunity.
  6. Pavel57
    Pavel57 10 September 2019 15: 50
    +2
    Si vis pacem, bellum for
  7. smaug78
    smaug78 10 September 2019 16: 04
    -7
    He formulated or issued then in an emotional impulse the unchanging credo of American foreign policy. Misconception, he expressed his credo. Stalin had the same credo. let the capitalists fight, the leadership of the USSR approvingly approached the German attack on France.
    1. astepanov
      astepanov 10 September 2019 17: 29
      +5
      Quote: smaug78
      formulated or issued then in an emotional impulse the unchanging credo of American foreign policy. Misconception, he expressed his credo.

      The New York Times is not a newspaper where people go with random emotions, and the position of a senator does not dispose to imprudent chatter, and the date - June 24, 441 - imposed a certain responsibility. The events that followed up to the present day clearly show that Truman expressed a common point of view. When did the "allies" open the second front? In the summer of 44, to the planned division of reparations, when the outcome was obvious. Wherever the United States went, everything ended in great blood and for a long time. So I agree with the author.
      1. smaug78
        smaug78 11 September 2019 10: 20
        -3
        The New York Times is not a newspaper where they crawl with random emotions, and the post of senator does not favor an indiscreet chatter, and the date - June 24, 441 - imposed a certain responsibility. but what would you say, I would never have thought.)))) That all the same we’ll wash our boots in the Indian Ocean (Zhirinovsky) or when we will launch 6 aircraft carriers (Klintsevich) into the water, but you continue.
  8. Prutkov
    Prutkov 10 September 2019 16: 21
    +2
    For some reason, everyone is convinced that Trump’s policy is contrary to Obama’s. In my opinion, on the contrary, they are very consistent. The missile defense system with the deployment of MK41 launchers began to be built under Obama. At the same time, the USA flatly refused to sign any obligations on Euro missile defense. Trump only finished the job by officially withdrawing from the INF Treaty. The sanctions policy launched under Obama was designed to oust Russia from the European energy market. These are events in Ukraine, and the collapse of the cost of oil with the help of the Saudis, and the nuclear deal with Iran with the expectation that Iran and the Saudis will squeeze Russia out of Europe. And then you could set fire to the Middle East, fortunately, Muslims themselves are actively striking matches. As a result, the United States alone should remain on the European market and fuel prices should skyrocket. But the Saudis and Iran did not cope with the task. And if so, then Trump removed the excess player from the market, breaking the nuclear deal with Iran. So, all US actions are very consistent.
  9. Sniper
    Sniper 10 September 2019 16: 22
    -2
    Poland is to blame. it all started with her.
  10. BAI
    BAI 10 September 2019 16: 52
    -2
    The United States, together with England, may conclude separate military agreements with Poland and Bandera Ukraine in order to push them into provocations to the glory of Anglo-American civilization.

    Absolutely right. Only not in the future, but in the present tense - they already conclude, or even conclude.
  11. Ali Kokand
    Ali Kokand 10 September 2019 17: 32
    +2
    There are some logical inconsistencies. Britain and France declared war on Germany. But besides France, Britain was not ready for war. After the Strange War, a hot war began with the shame of Dunkirk. And Churchill flatly refused the peace treaty with Germany, despite the voyage of Hess on Messer. Not only in the West are they able to rewrite history and hush up uncomfortable events.
    1. Per se.
      Per se. 12 September 2019 12: 46
      +4
      Quote: Ali Kokand
      But besides France, Britain was not ready for war. After the Strange War, a hot war began with the shame of Dunkirk.
      "I brought you peace! ", said British Prime Minister Chamberlain, waving a piece of paper in front of the public, with Hitler's promise not to start a war with Britain. Chamberlain then returned from the Munich conference, where he and Daladier fed Czechoslovakia to Hitler, even earlier Britain turned a blind eye to the Anschluss, according to which in The Third Reich entered Austria. Closed eyes and all violations of the restrictions of Versailles, allowing Germany to arm. The Anglo-Saxons were so naive, did not understand that war was inevitable? By no means, what Harry Truman voiced was originally laid down when from the defeated in World War I Germany began to do anti-USSR, with the prospect of killing two "birds with one stone", literally and figuratively, - having pitted Germany against the Soviet Union, destroying or weakening an independent socialist state, gaining super profits in the war.

      Germany was not enough for Austria and Czechoslovakia for the war with the USSR, for the necessary potential the Germans were given almost all of Europe, including France. "Strange war", only at first glance strange, the fact that Hitler allowed the British to evacuate from near Dunkirk, stopping Guderian's tanks for almost three days, suggests that Hitler was a henchman of the Anglo-Saxons, who subsequently fulfilled his task.

      Now, our reality. There is no Soviet Union, Russia is in capitalism, so why is the "Englishwoman crap" again, why are the Anglo-Saxons pushing Russia out of their bourgeois "sandbox", despite the fact that we have oligarchs under their control who keep their money in their banks and their currency? Because Russia still has a nuclear missile potential from the Soviet Union. If the West needs Russia not dead, then only very weak, and not having the ability to be the only one in the world to destroy the United States and Britain. Our boys are bad guys, the remaining potential does not allow us to immediately surrender, the people will not understand. In addition, there is a temptation to squeeze out the share of the masters of world capitalism, and by puffing the cheeks to raise the ratings, which under Yeltsin's rule fell below the plinth.

      Here is a new "strange war", sanctions and persecution, in which our moneybags do not suffer much, puffing out their cheeks, "butting" with the owners, but they both make money on this, when education, health care, science and culture fall in Russia, while optimizing and reducing the remaining production, the entire great legacy from the superpower. What will happen next, perhaps a war, but this war will become an aspen stake in the black and rotten heart of capitalism. As soon as the real smell of fried, the oligarch brothers will have to show their true, dependent nature. They will dress up in a hard time, socialism, new leaders will return to us, it's a pity that we will have to pay for all this again. Are there other options for our happiness in capitalism, in someone else's system and under someone else's rules? Share, I expressed only my opinion.
      1. Leonid Anatolevich
        Leonid Anatolevich 24 September 2019 11: 58
        0
        "Germany was not enough for Austria and Czechoslovakia for the war with the USSR, for the necessary potential the Germans were given practically all of Europe, including France."
        Austria and the Sudetenland were not connected with the USSR, Hitler promised to unite the Germans in one country. Memel region - the same meaning. Further went Danzig because of which a conflict arose between the Poles and Hitler.
  12. TiRex
    TiRex 10 September 2019 17: 35
    -3
    good article
  13. fruit_cake
    fruit_cake 10 September 2019 18: 25
    -1
    it’s enough to recall the scalps and immediately there are associations that the Indians took them, but in fact they gave the dollar for the scalp indulging the genocide of the local population, but then they rewrote the story so that the Indians were so cruel that they took the scalps
  14. parusnik
    parusnik 10 September 2019 19: 03
    +3
    ... Hmm ... laughing There is only one thing left, after reading this article, to raise strategic aviation into the sky and bomb, bomb London and Washington ... laughing
  15. Rostislav
    Rostislav 10 September 2019 19: 40
    +3
    Banderaites or "Baltic tigers" will not be enough to start a war with Russia, they will not stand for weeks. So, what is next? France, together with Germany and Italy, to rush into the attack, remembering the NATO charter? I doubt it. It would be more profitable to attack yourself immediately, the effect of surprise. And the media in their hands will try to appoint Russia as the aggressor. Look how famously the results of the Second World War are repainted.
  16. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 10 September 2019 20: 38
    +2
    If the United States and conclude a truly equal treaty with Russia, for example, instead of START-3, then only to break it at a convenient time. Russia is much easier to negotiate equal relations with China
    An equal agreement with China is not possible, wake up, Count. For China, all the barbarians and China above all else, he is still a boa constrictor. did not know? feel So, she herself and rely only on the Sun and the Navy.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 10 September 2019 21: 02
      -1
      Colleague, you forgot about the VKS, they will be noticeably better than our current Navy. smile
  17. Dimonst
    Dimonst 11 September 2019 02: 25
    0
    Good article. Normal analytics. I don’t understand what the discussion is about on neighboring branches if everything is written about geopolitics normally. I agree with the author.
  18. Nestorych
    Nestorych 11 September 2019 11: 05
    -1
    Another whining to say the least of the patriot, although it’s worth saying tougher.)) There is nothing to whine, we must learn to use the principle ourselves:
    If we see that Germany wins the war, we should help Russia, if Russia, we should help Germany, and let them kill each other as much as possible.

    And it does not boast of millions of victims and billions of help to all prostitutes, at the expense of their fellow citizens. In management, there is the concept of efficiency, when the smaller the resources the greater the effect, the one done!
  19. fairman
    fairman 13 September 2019 21: 28
    -1
    Quote: Chaldon48
    The principle "let them kill each other as much as possible" arose especially in relation to Russia long before WWII, even if you do not go too deep into history, it operated both in WWII and in civilian life.

    And someone else believes Nalny and the bulkers! then everything can change on Kolyma
  20. nikvic46
    nikvic46 14 September 2019 06: 01
    0
    The author completely cut off the path to contracts. Do we have reliable allies? That is ideological obstacles, then overt pragmatism. And we really need at least one ally. No one is washing with one hand.
  21. 16112014nk
    16112014nk 14 September 2019 17: 55
    +1
    It has long been known:
  22. Eug
    Eug 15 September 2019 09: 26
    0
    It would be logical for the United States to use England in the European Union as a "Trojan horse", rather than pushing it towards Brexit ...
  23. Victor Dubrovsky
    Victor Dubrovsky 15 September 2019 10: 33
    -1
    Unfortunately for most of our "analysts", analogy is not a proof, no matter how many analogies you throw out. So methodologically, all such "analysis" is a blowing of mental bubbles ...
  24. Rus2012
    Rus2012 15 September 2019 17: 14
    0
    Quote: Eug
    England in the European Union as a "Trojan horse"

    for the exhaustion of the function of "Trojan ..." - they were offered by others;)
  25. Rus2012
    Rus2012 15 September 2019 17: 17
    +1
    Quote: Victor Dubrovsky
    unfortunately for most of our "analysts", the analogy is not proof

    "An analogy is not a proof," and a hailey-likey, in your opinion, is? :)

    Moreover, when analogies regularly crawl from all cracks and constantly - it's time to remember the "rotten habits of the Naglo-Saxons" and not step on the notorious rake also regularly.
    Although "history teaches nothing ..." (c)
  26. yehat
    yehat 16 September 2019 17: 18
    -1
    Quote: Mavrikiy
    China above all else is still a boa constrictor.

    With China, not everything is simple.
    he is surrounded by those who do not like him much.
    inside there is a giant stratification as an economic and social one. so cultural and even ideological. in fact, his situation is now very fragile, and it is not for nothing that the Americans are right now putting in a lot of strength to fight China.
    China is a country that steals girls in Vietnam and other neighboring countries.
    China is a country that suppresses Shinjiang and Tibet
    China is a country where in one place people live like 3000 years ago, and not far - in high-rises.
    etc.
  27. Thomas the Unbelieving
    Thomas the Unbelieving 21 September 2019 18: 01
    0
    I'm not sure if the author is right about everything. NATO is the American military organization occupying Europe. Their "allies" are simply armies of vassals. When Macron blabbed about the creation of a European army (and he was from the Rothschilds, not from the Rockefellers), he received the "yellow vests". As in 1968 de Gaulle from the demand from the US for gold.
    1. Leonid Anatolevich
      Leonid Anatolevich 24 September 2019 11: 52
      0
      De Gaulle received the Yellow Vests?