Thursday 23rd of September 2021

a dilemma...

dilemmadilemma                                               New documents show how the USSR’s eventual WWII allies France & Britain wanted to bomb Soviet oilfields before Hitler invasion.   Moscow's reluctant World War II allies France and Britain considered bombing the Soviet Union before Hitler's Nazis invaded, newly declassified documents show. Their goal was to disrupt supplies of fuel from southern oilfields. 

The Russian national archive this week is hosting a new exhibition about the Soviet Union’s actions on the global stage between September 1939, when World War II began in earnest, and June 1941, when Nazi Germany and its allies - including Italy, Finland, Romania, Slovakia and Hungary - invaded the USSR.

RT was given a preview of the artefacts on display, some of which have never been shown to the general public before. Among them are French documents detailing plans to launch an aerial bombing campaign against the USSR, which were developed together with its British allies shortly before the German invasion of France in May 1940.

Maurice Gamelin, the French commander-in-chief at the time, eyed using French troops in Syria to attack oilfields in what is now Azerbaijan, as well as its capital Baku. Azeri oil was the most important source of fuel for the USSR and, by extension, Germany, if it could get its hands on the territory. Moscow and Berlin at the time had a non-aggression pact, even as Hitler was preparing to stab Stalin in the back. An act which didn't surprise shrewd thinkers in Moscow.

The suggested French airstrikes would have been launched in conjunction with other activities aimed at undermining the USSR, like inciting its Muslim population to rebel against Moscow. Germany’s blitzkrieg in France threw a spanner in those plans.

The short-lived Stalin-Hitler deal came into being only after Moscow’s attempts to sign a mutual defense agreement with Paris and London was rejected by the West Europeans. The same powers gave Berlin the green light to annex Czechoslovakia in 1938 and stood by as Germany invaded Poland, the following year. The eight-month period following Britain's declaration of hostilities is known as the Phoney War.

The reluctance of the Western European heavyweights to join forces with the Soviets against Germany was not surprising. This was long before Hitler’s name became synonymous with unspeakable evil and fascist ideology had many sympathisers in the West, including among its elites.

talin, on the other hand, led a nation that had declared global socialist revolution as its goal and was perceived as the greater threat by many. There was no shortage of politicians who would gladly see the Germans crush the Soviets.

The USSR had no reliable allies in Europe and lots of potential enemies, so its leadership believed it could enhance its security through land grabs of its own. Materials shown by the Russian archive relate to Moscow’s attempt to negotiate a land swap with Finland, the failure of which led to an attack in November 1939, the coerced incorporation of the Baltic states, and USSR’s takeover of eastern parts of Poland shortly after it was attacked by the Nazis. Other episodes of that hectic period in modern history are also covered. 


Read more:


FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW ••••••••••¶¶¶¶¶¶¶§§§§§§§!!!!



rabid soros russiophobia...

Here we go again. The Soros financed network goes full crap against Russia's past present and future. We did not expect anything else... "Stalin was responsible for WW2????"...



Stalin's War: A New History of World War II



A prize-winning historian reveals how Stalin—not Hitler—was the animating force of World War II in this major new history.

World War II endures in the popular imagination as a heroic struggle between good and evil, with villainous Hitler driving its events. But Hitler was not in power when the conflict erupted in Asia—and he was certainly dead before it ended. His armies did not fight in multiple theaters, his empire did not span the Eurasian continent, and he did not inherit any of the spoils of war. That central role belonged to Joseph Stalin. The Second World War was not Hitler’s war; it was Stalin’s war.
Drawing on ambitious new research in Soviet, European, and US archives, Stalin’s War revolutionizes our understanding of this global conflict by moving its epicenter to the east. Hitler’s genocidal ambition may have helped unleash Armageddon, but as McMeekin shows, the war which emerged in Europe in September 1939 was the one Stalin wanted, not Hitler. So, too, did the Pacific war of 1941–1945 fulfill Stalin’s goal of unleashing a devastating war of attrition between Japan and the “Anglo-Saxon” capitalist powers he viewed as his ultimate adversary.
McMeekin also reveals the extent to which Soviet Communism was rescued by the US and Britain’s self-defeating strategic moves, beginning with Lend-Lease aid, as American and British supply boards agreed almost blindly to every Soviet demand. Stalin’s war machine, McMeekin shows, was substantially reliant on American materiél from warplanes, tanks, trucks, jeeps, motorcycles, fuel, ammunition, and explosives, to industrial inputs and technology transfer, to the foodstuffs which fed the Red Army.
This unreciprocated American generosity gave Stalin’s armies the mobile striking power to conquer most of Eurasia, from Berlin to Beijing, for Communism.
A groundbreaking reassessment of the Second World War, Stalin’s War is essential reading for anyone looking to understand the current world order.


Read more:



BULLSHIT!!!! Yes the present world is crap, but not because of Russia but because of... Woodrow Wilson, a yankee doodle, and... a POM called Celic Rhodes... But we're getting ahead of ourselves here... 

Someone at The American Conservative has mitigated the thingy a bit (possibly not enough)...



However, in the face of all the evidence of Soviet villainy, the reader may easily forget that Adolf Hitler’s name is missing in McMeekin’s book for dozens of pages at a time. Like A.J.P. Taylor, whose The Origins of the Second World War (1962) I remember reading excitedly as an undergraduate, McMeekin would have us believe that Hitler was less a driver of events than a world leader who reacted to the evolving moves of Josef Stalin or his British, French, or American counterparts. McMeekin’s success at showing Stalin’s appallingly nasty role in world affairs notwithstanding, it all comes back to Hitler. It is a bald defiance of the evidence to write a history of World War II by demoting Hitler to the historical background. Stalin stood athwart world history by 1946 not just because FDR and Churchill “appeased” him, but because Hitler shattered eastern Europe’s uneasy peace by invading Poland on September 1, 1939, and then violated his non-aggression pact with Stalin on June 22, 1941. 

Stalin’s War fits comfortably into a world where it is now fashionable to hate Russia. Earlier this summer, Nick Carter, Britain’s top military commander, told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that Putin’s Russia was “an acute threat” to European peace. The CBC’s coverage of Carter’s comment was the latest in a series of media stories in recent years about Putin’s foreign policy, his clampdown on dissent in Russia, and his alleged “meddling” in the domestic affairs of other countries. Last March, President Joe Biden even called Putin a “killer.” The twist on anti-Russianism today is that, unlike during the anti-communist years of the 1950s, it’s now the Soros-backed progressive left that demonizes Moscow. 

In the final analysis, Stalin’s War hardly poses a security threat to Putin. It is not single-handedly responsible for Russia’s recent “blacklisting” of Bard. But if there is a new Cold War between Washington and Putin’s government, Sean McMeekin’s book does nothing to improve relations. 



Ian Dowbiggin is a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada and teaches modern European history at the University of Prince Edward Island. 


Read more:



If you wonder why Putin does not like Soros, this exposé should give you a clue... Putin isn't vindictive per se. He does not like what Soros does on an existential level. Soros is a two-faced hypocritical mongrel who uses the "left" ideology (sorry, not the full left of socialism — Soros' left is the chardonnay-sipping elites) to fund his full-blown capitalism