Western Betrayal

When I said 'understandable' I didn't mean to give a judgement one way or the other - but to point out that we all develop attitudes based on the information we have at a given time. Sadly, the US and many Western countries have been castigated at times for what they didn't do (varying points around the world) rather than being acknowledged for what they did do to make a positive difference. Sometimes, the western countries have been limited by political will, or finance and sometimes because they can't always fix what went wrong somewhere else. I should also point out that sometimes it seems to be human nature to resent the one who gives aid, because pride is hurt.

 

I believe you. Actually the country should be called Paionia but you go tell them that yourself

 

I understand what you are talking about and don't disagree.
However, what I'm trying to point out is that expecting Americans to kill, or die, to help other peoples is unrealistic when those people aren't willing to do the same things to help themselves. Anybody who expects Americans to go to war on their behalf had better have some serious skin in the game, too.

 

Remember that the ones hoping the Americans will suddenly appear and destroy the soviets were mostly poor farm people, with no school, who...have heard (who knows from where) about America, and how this country and his army represents freedom...
Just think how the Americans have been seen by the whole Europe, in ww1 and ww2.When everything went wrong, the American army helped Europe and brought an end to the war.They were seen as mystical heroes, sent by God to protect the ones in jeopardy ....Just try to put yourself in their place and believe me that you will find yourself praying for the Americans to save you (and your country) out of the communist claws.
(and btw, there was a very serious resistance, against the soviet army, in all the countries that were forced to become communist....the last partisans were arrested in mid 80's)

 

That was due to Britain's plans of turning Germany eastwards to destroy Soviet Union. France wanted to fight Germany but Britain refused to do so.


...And by this date, certain members of the Milner Group and of the British Conservative government had reached the fantastic idea that they could kill two birds with one stone by setting Germany and Russia against one another in Eastern Europe.

In this way they felt that the two enemies would stalemate one another, or that Germany would become satisfied with the oil of Rumania and the wheat of the Ukraine.

It never occurred to anyone in a responsible position that Germany and Russia might make common cause, even temporarily, against the West. Even less did it occur to them that Russia might beat Germany and thus open all Central Europe to Bolshevism.

In order to carry out this plan of allowing Germany to drive eastward against Russia, it was necessary to do three things:

(1) to liquidate all the countries standing between Germany and Russia;

(2) to prevent France from honoring her alliances with these countries; and

(3) to hoodwink the English people into accepting this as a necessary, indeed, the only solution to the international problem.

The Chamberlain group were so successful in all three of these things that they came within an ace of succeeding, and failed only because of the obstinacy of the Poles, the unseemly haste of Hitler, and the fact that at the eleventh hour the Milner Group realized the implications of their policy and tried to reverse it...

Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, ch 12


...We are told sometimes that the criminal plot of the two dictatorships – Stalin’s and Hitler’s – was legitimate under the international law of the time. What’s more, it constituted a justified or even essential defense in view of the Munich Agreement concluded in September 1938 among Nazi Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and France. That treaty was designed to channel German aggression eastward...

http://www.polandun.org/templates/

- Mr. Adam Daniel ROTFELD, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland. Fifty-ninth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Commemoration of the sixtieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War

 

If Chamberlain´s idea was to get Hitler attack eastwards it did not work too well. I mean, didn´t Hitler attack west first ( Poland was invaded both by Germany and the USSR )?

 

I think the whole idea is rubbish. Hitler DID attack eastward (Poland is east of Germany), but Chamberlain declared war on Germany because of that attack. Why would Chamberlain declare war on Germany if Hitler had done what Chamberlain wanted? None of Chamberlain's acts since March, 1939, make any sense if the theory is valid.

Your comment raises the question, would Hitler have attacked France and Britain if they had simply let Germany continue to attack eastward? The whole idea is simplistic and ignores the fact that Chamberlain acted contrary to the theory from at least March, 1939.

 

I may be sounding an ignorant, but Chamberlain's cabinet isn't remembered for such great minds as able to make up such a grand anti-soviet conspiracy. I think the importance of this matter is being exaggerated. At least from the Soviet side the entire affair looked so discreet and unnoticeable as being the same as non-existent.

 

You are right nobody has to. But he should be prepared to discuss his views and to back them up. He has obviously chosen not to.

 

Hey, you just woke up a zombie thread!

 

Yep. I missed Von Poop's comment the first time LOL .

 

And something that important can't be missed right


Cheers...