By Ken Leslie for The Saker Blog
1. The last warning…
In the middle of the current global turmoil, largely ignored by the Western media, President Vladimir Putin of Russia recently wrote an article for the National Interest magazine (the article is featured on this site). In it, he magisterially dissected and integrated one of the most disputed topics in contemporary history—the cause(s) and antecedent(s) of World War II. The article is long and very detailed, drawing on a rich historical and historiographic documentation and it leaves no stone unturned. The point I wish to elaborate on here is that far from being a historical dissertation, the article is a last warning to the enemies delivered in the form of a parable. Rather than expound on the precarious state of the world and the seemingly inexorable drift to war, Putin used the tragic landscape of the late 1930s Europe to shed light not only on the true causes of WWII but also on the causes of a rapidly approaching WWIII.
Although discussing all the principal players responsible for perhaps the greatest holocide in history, I had a feeling that the article was aimed particularly at the Anglo-Saxon part of the Western empire (which also includes the EU, Israel and some Arab and Asian countries). Although I can’t be certain, there is a sense that this is president Putin’s last appeal to the former allies in the struggle against Nazism, the last melancholy hand of friendship extended to the powers that almost ignited WWII and are busy repeating the same horrible ritual of a total war against Russia. There is something deeply Russian and Orthodox Christian about Putin’s appeal. Precisely because he is aware of the deep enmity that the Anglo-Saxon establishment harbours for Russia in all its manifestations, he is that much more grateful to the British and American soldiers and statesmen for that all-too-brief, almost miraculous interlude of friendship and co-operation, that even today 80 years later appears to many like an unfortunate tear in the yarn of history.
And yet, this interlude offered a glimpse of a new dawn. The people in the West saw with their own eyes how uniquely heroic the Soviet people were in the defence of their motherland. The workers and peasants of the Soviet Union realised that there were many good people in the West who did not bear the eternal grudge but were glad to have the USSR on their side. It is often assumed that this short détente lasted five years—from the start of the German invasion until say, 1946, but this would not be accurate. The mistrust between the almost-allies was such that it took a concerted effort by Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt as well as a number of well-disposed politicians (e.g. Harry Hopkins, Anthony Eden) to cement the bond which started to crack well before the end of hostilities.
The “weakest link” in the allied leadership chain was Winston Churchill. Not fond of Russians to say the least, he was an imperialist and anti-communist par excellence. The current anti-racism protests show that this side of Churchill is well known to the younger generation. Whose fault is it that those same younger people don’t remember that Churchill once suppressed his natural instincts and fought a good fight against the greatest menace the world has ever known? Here again, we see the results of a massive blowback caused by the unceasing attempts to diminish the international and anti-fascist nature of the war-time alliance and WWII. Instead of cherishing the values that were defended by the three great nations, modern historians and politicians (with few exceptions) have competed in ways of demonising the Soviet Union (and Russia), burying the existential threat of nazi-fascism and treating WWII as a bloody misunderstanding among otherwise friendly nations. Yes, Nazi Germany was dangerous, but the USSR and its successor have been much more pernicious.
Granted, Churchill’s leadership in WWII was not enough to secure him a prime ministership in 1945, but the overall positive role he played in allying himself with the Americans and Soviets and his reputation as an anti-fascist gradually withered and ultimately died by the end of the last century. In a way, his fate is more tragic than that of Stalin who was the first to experience the “awakening of the people”. Although Stalin has not been fully rehabilitated, his role in saving the Soviet Union and freeing the world from the fascist beast is slowly being recognised and re-evaluated.
It was Churchill who started undermining the war-time alliance long before the guns fell silent. He sabotaged the relationship between Roosevelt and Stalin, refused to consider giving independence to British colonies, undermined the prospects of a progressive US government via his intelligence apparatus in the USA (he sent Roald Dahl to spy on Henry Wallace) and in the ultimate betrayal of the good faith that was supposed to underpin the alliance, began planning an all-out attack on the Soviet Union as early as 1944. Named Operation Unthinkable, this plan envisaged a massive offensive against the USSR which would involve Polish troops and even re-armed German prisoners of war.
Many historical records note Stalin’s deep disappointment and a sense of hurt at the betrayal of the blood brotherhood by Churchill and Truman. Long after peace returned to the villages and cities of Europe, Stalin kept warning and beseeching his former allies not to throw away the legacy of friendship and co-operation. Despite the decades of cruel and inhumane attacks on the USSR that ensued, contributing substantially to its downfall, Soviet leaders and people never forgot the supreme sacrifice made by British and American soldiers and sailors who gave their lives in the struggle against the common enemy. This tradition of honouring the Western allies has been preserved and nurtured by President Putin. The campaign in the West to denigrate the great sacrifice of the Soviet people brought about an absurd situation in which the brave British sailors who took part in the war-time convoys that delivered badly needed supplies to the USSR were barred from receiving Soviet decorations by David Cameron.[1]
Perhaps the most hurtful and one could say evil blow that the former reluctant allies could deliver has been the attempt to re-write the history of WWII and treat Russia as a co-aggressor on the par with Germany. This is a red line for any Russian patriot and any right-thinking human being. The constant pressure to delegitimise the role of the USSR in freeing the world from the menace of fascism has led to the revival of fascist tendencies in some European countries including Croatia, the Baltic states, the Ukraine and others. These virulent forms of extreme nationalism (Chauvin-ism) were salvaged from the embers of the dying Nazi Reich, cultivated for decades in the satanic laboratories of the Western intelligence services (including Israel’s) and weaponised against Russia and its allies.[2]
A special role in the total war against Russia has been assigned to Poland—a Slav nation whose complex history has largely rested on a constant opposition to Russia and somewhat less, Germany. Briefly, Poland’s raison d’etre and geopolitical role has been to act as a spoiler in any attempts to bring about a peaceful co-existence in Europe. In the 1920s and 1930s, Polish extreme right-wing (it could be argued fascist) regime saw the country as a major power which by virtue of its religion and military prowess should rule over Central Europe.[3] The Vatican’s Intermarium (“between the seas”) project designed in the 19th Century aimed at countering the rise of the protestant Prussia in the West and Orthodox Russia in the East. It involved forming a federation from the (now former) Austro-Hungarian Slav provinces under the auspices of the Catholic Church. After the Bolshevik revolution, Poland put the plan into practice and awarded itself the leadership of the prospective “cordon sanitaire”. With the help of its Western patrons (especially Britain and France), it occupied the largely Russian-speaking regions of the Ukraine and Byelorussia. Under the doctrine of Prometheism, Poland started lighting “fires of freedom” all along the Soviet border. The rest of Poland’s nefarious role has been (belatedly) exposed by Russian historians. Far from being an innocent victim of Nazi expansionism, Poland wholeheartedly collaborated with Germany in plotting against the Soviet Union, planning the mass removal of the Jews, sabotaging any possibility of an anti-Nazi alliance and enslaving and converting their “heathen” Slav brethren.
It is this giant geopolitical déjà vu combined with an exponentially increasing risk of a global war that must have compelled president Putin to address the Western audiences—perhaps for the last time. As recently as 50 years ago, it would have been unthinkable for Western politicians and media to equate the USSR and Germany with regard to the culpability for the war. Yet, a concerted campaign in the Western media and chancelleries that accompanied the fall the of the USSR and the ramping up of a Russophobic campaign in the intervening years have led to the current dangerous impasse which leaves no room for diplomacy and negotiation. Largely unnoticed by the commenters, in his inimitable subtle and statesmanlike style, president Putin delivered to the western public what I believe to be the last appeal for peaceful co-existence. As I stated above, the appeal was directed primarily at the Anglo-Saxon powers which are currently at the forefront of the undeclared war against Russia.
He reminded his former allies of the dangers of using “running dogs” such as Poland or the Ukraine in order to destabilise Russia. He also informed them in no uncertain terms of Russia’s determination not to allow any further besmirching of its historic sacrifice. No more mollycoddling of petty fascist fiefdoms in the name of class or ethnic/racial solidarity. It was also a warning to the Poles that their state policy of siding with any country as long as it is inimical to Russia can only lead to ruin and renewed partition. I’ll paraphrase the notorious Russophobe Josef Beck, one of the chief architects of Poland’s pre-WWII foreign policy, who admitted after the war that Poland was destroyed because it had been acting in the interests of the Vatican and not the Polish people.
In other words, president Putin drew a line—if you wish to avoid a potential nuclear war, stop demonising and destabilising Russia and join us in creating a more equitable world. Russia will never abandon its unique civilisational path and any attempts at thwarting its legitimate claim to life and development will be punished harshly. Russian insistence on peaceful conflict resolution should not be confused for weakness. Having experienced one of the greatest genocides in history, Russia will never advocate war. But if war becomes inevitable, it will fight to the death. This stern warning was couched in the language of reconciliation. President Putin harks back to the war-time alliance with the USA and Great Britain to remind the modern audiences that confrontation is not the only way but that if attacked, Russia would defend itself to the last Russian and inflict terrible and (this time) unsustainable damage.
As noted by some commenters, his message might have been too subtle for the ignorant and ideologically blinded hacks posing as geopolitical experts in the West. So, let me enlighten them a bit by explaining the deeper meaning of president Putin’s message. Those who think that this has to do mainly with righting the wrongs of modern Western history are only partly correct. The main point is simple yet profound: Whichever form the Russian state takes, it will never be accepted as an equal by the racists, fascists and religious bigots in the West. The President is deeply aware of this but is hoping against hope that some form of détente is still possible. To elucidate the situation, he uses historical precedent to highlight the similarity between the geopolitical situations in 1941 and today and delivers a parable disguised as a historical treatise.
2. History doesn’t repeat…
A long time ago, there was a large and powerful country—let’s call it country X. Having gone through a decade of terrible convulsions and a series of civil wars which resulted in millions of deaths and a wholesale destruction of the country’s social and political systems, it began to grow and develop and this growth was perceived as a direct challenge to the Western imperialist system. The country was far from perfect. Years of suffering and neglect had taken their toll and large parts of the country needed rebuilding—especially the transport infrastructure. The people were traumatised and yearning for peace. Then, somewhat unexpectedly, a strong leader emerged who shunned the idea of imperial expansion and focussed on building up the country and preparing it for a possible war. In a famous speech, the leader warned that the country needed to catch up with the West and warned of the dangers of the attempts by the imperialist enemy to encircle and destroy it.
The leader knew that the accusations levelled at his country were mainly propaganda lies. While some Westerners were fascinated by the rapid development of the vast land, most were convinced that the ideas of suppression of rampant capitalism, development within one’s own borders, ending of imperialism and moving towards a multipolar world were seriously endangering the survival of the imperialist system. In order to curtail and extinguish the perennial enemy, the Western powers started inflaming extreme nationalism in their client states (combined with financial globalism) to encircle and destroy the only country that was a threat to their dominance. Although one country was preeminent in terms of military might, the strategy called for continental unity and this was achieved by co-opting smaller countries one after another and pushing the borders of the aggressive empire ever closer to those of country X. Hiding behind the enlightened principle of defending the Western civilisation against the peril from the East, the Empire’s aim was to surround and eventually destroy country X in order to plunder its natural wealth and human resources and forever extinguish its spirit.
The leader of X was desperate to avoid conflict. Through an international forum set up to prevent future wars, he reached out to Western governments time after time trying to convince them of his peaceful intentions and readiness to co-operate in building a peaceful multipolar world. All his attempts were in vain. The military machine of the West was moving inexorably towards his country. Not only that but a new threat emerged from a belligerent rapidly militarising island off the country’s Eastern coast whose militarist revival was supported by X’s principal enemy. The loudest and most vicious enemy of country X was a smaller neighbouring state whose rabid hatred of X and religious zeal ensured its preeminent position as the mailed fist of the Western aggression. With the help of Western intelligence services, this country encouraged and funded innumerable plots against country X and sabotaged its attempts to revamp the international security architecture.
The leader of X was demonised in the imperialist press as a ruthless butcher of various nations and ethnic groups within or outside his country, an autocrat whose ruthless grip on power was maintained by fear and whose removal of foreign agents from the political and economic apparatus was evidence of his genocidal bloodthirst. By means of a vicious propaganda campaign, a regime of harsh sanctions and an intelligence offensive, X was gradually turned into a pariah, isolated and despised. At the same time, X gave hope to many people around the world that a more just and fair society was possible. Poor countries still burdened by colonialism and imperialism looked especially favourably on X as a potential patron and protector.
Instead of folding under the ostracism and pressure of sanctions, X continued to develop rapidly and soon outpaced most of its Western competitors. The leader of X attempted to parry the concerted campaign of the imperialist enemy by reaching out to various Western countries trying to create a united defensive front. However, this was made impossible by a fascist feeding frenzy that led to a dismemberment and occupation of a previously neutral/friendly country.
In a belated attempt at creating a buffer zone against the merciless existential foe, X recaptured some of the territories it had lost previously. For this it was lambasted and chastised even more. The critical moment came when the enemy, emboldened by years of appeasement and dithering, breeched the old borders of X and quickly found itself about 450 km away from the capital of X. An erroneous perception of the enemy places all the blame for the aggression on a single country. Yet, with a couple of honourable exceptions, the entire continent contributed troops and logistical, financial, economic and propaganda support to the aggressor.
3. Guess who
The legerdemain I employed here to illustrate the peril facing the world might just work. If you toggle USSR/Russia, Germany/US-NATO, Czechoslovakia/Yugoslavia/Ukraine, you will realise that the similarities between that faithful summer of 1941 and the COVID-infected summer of 2020 are more than accidental. I leave it to you to fill in the names of other players. I am not claiming that the two situations are identical, but simply that the template of demonisation perseveres through centuries and political systems. If I’d tried harder, I could have fitted the Russian empire into this template but it is not worth the effort—not because the Russian empire does not matter but because the comparison between the USSR and modern Russia suffices for my purposes.[4] In the same way that Stalin used religion and tradition to strengthen the fighting spirit of the people, Putin is turning to the epic struggle of the Soviets to prepare the Russian people for what is likely to come. In a supreme irony (another one of these) in its attempt to suffocate the historical memory of Russia’s role in WWII the West has denigrated its own effort to the point where younger generations of Westerners have no knowledge of their ancestors’ just war. In a sense, this is the blowback of all blowbacks.
The rest of the story which now refers to WWII goes something like this: At this very last moment, when all hope was lost, the leaders of the three major powers overcame their suspicions and joined hands in an epic struggle against fascism and militarism. For president Putin (and many of us) this moment was magical—akin to the brief state of weightlessness induced by a freefalling aeroplane. Freed from the gravity of earthly power, the world could ascend to new hights of peaceful development. His plea/warning is unlikely to be heeded by the intended audience. Nevertheless, it is very necessary. The world cannot afford another summer of war because this one would be unbearably hot. Briefly, Putin is saying “Remember your brave ancestors who gave their lives in the joint struggle and honour them by embracing Russia as an equal and respected partner.” Putin’s essay is a wholesale repudiation of the canard that “countries don’t have friends, only interests”. Although he is appealing to the sound political interests of his Western “partners”, he is articulating something greater—a world based not on predation and profit but on humane and universally valid civilisational principles.
There is little hope that his hand will be grasped by the current lot of political clowns who are currently in power in the West. While pretending to be friendly to Russia, the Jesuitical fraud Trump has done more to damage the Russian-American ties than most of his predecessors taken together. The mendacious tapir Boris is doubling down on using the Ukraine to irritate and annoy Russia.[5] In that, he bears some similarity to his idol Churchill who spared no effort to criticise the Russian Empire and sabotage the Soviet Union. However, the comparison ends there. Unlike Churchill, who despite his despicable ideology and actions was a statesman of a great calibre, Boris is a Churchill wannabe who unlike his idol seems incapable of grasping the uniqueness of the present moment and the importance of not repeating historical mistakes.
- To my knowledge, president Putin has never publicly addressed the occupation of parts of Russia by the allied intervention forces in 1918. ↑
- Note similar attempts by the Anglo-Zionist empire to equate China with imperial Japan through the curriculum of Hong Kong schools ↑
- My criticism of Poland does not imply my fondness for Bolshevism. Needless to say, Poland has never changed its position vis-à-vis Russia irrespective of the latter’s system of government. ↑
- In the same way that Stalin and Putin have been accused of being the butchers of the Ukrainians, Chechens and Tatars, Nicholas II was being lambasted by the “progressive” Jews for the pogroms (which occurred mainly in the Western non-Orthodox areas of the Russian Empire). Despite saving the Jews from the holocaust and being the first to support and recognise Israel (also see The Jewish Autonomous Oblast), Stalin soon became the bete noire of the Zionists/Trotskyites and a synonym for antisemitism. Despite having excellent relations with the Russian Jews and Israel, Putin has been the target of Zionist wrath almost from the beginning. The reader should draw their own conclusions. ↑
- British involvement with the Ukrainian nationalism stretches back to the end of WWII when Sir Collin Gubbins took over from Abwehr as the runner of the Prometheus terrorist network. Of course, the links between the MI6 and Polish inspired anti-Soviet networks almost certainly existed before 1939. ↑
The objectives of WW2 was the occupation of Russia, the weakening of Germany and the establishment of Israel.
Proof is that Rolls Royce started mass production of Merlin engines in 1933 followed shortly thereafter by mass production of Mustang engines across the pond in late 33 or early 34, loooong before any signs of war.
It was a set up and Hitler was a fool!
Dear Abel,
It is natural that the Anglo-Saxons should have been wary given that England had lost a million people and its ruling class was completely wiped out in the previous war. The Soviets were arming and training the Weimar military in the 1920s as a counter to the British and French (who were weaponising Poland). The thanks they received? A second genocidal Drang on Russia in less than 30 years. That’s some record.
The mustache underestimated the treachery of the Anglos. He kept trying to make a peace deal with them. He let their army escape from Dunkirk in the hopes that a peace deal could be worked out. The Anglos continued their plan dated ten years before WW1 to destroy Germany. The Anglos always fomented war on the continent. The mustache also mis-identified his enemies as the Jewish people. It was really the extreme Zionists founded by Rothschild who worked with the Anglos to destroy Germany and to establish Israel. These Zionists never had any regard for their own people who followed the false religion, and they have responsibility for the Holocaust.
Who Financed the mustache’s war? Some say it was the Rothschilds or their agents. Some say that when Germany took control of their own central bank that the economy grew so much that they financed the war by themselves.
It was probably a lot more complex but in essence I have to agree. WW I was a continuation of WW II.
Harry S. Truman put it this way:
“If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.”
Shouldn’t it be the other way around, syntactically speaking?
Er, yeah, of course. Sorry I miswrote that. /:)
This is a clear and accurate summary of where the world is today, poised on the brink of a final war threatening the continuation of human life on this beautiful planet. The worst of us are threatening to destroy all of us in an apotheosis of their evil hubris. The perversion of modern science will be employed for this insane project, unless we can find some way to avert it.
Dear Mike,
Thank you very much. I agree completely.
“I had a feeling that the article was aimed particularly at the Anglo-Saxon part of the Western empire (which also includes the EU, Israel and some Arab and Asian countries).”
From my perspective, Putin was most of all addressing Poland and it’s potential for treachery, by using it’s access to the Russian border as a bargaining chip. I thought, where the European nations were concerned, he was very even-handed in demonstrating the interwoven complexity of government’s pursuing national interests. He was extremely kind to the United States. I thought he was hinting that the European nations use caution in any possible rush to benefit from the downfall of the United States. That was the gist I picked up from this – a desire by Putin to remind the powerful European nations how plans to prosper from another powerful nation’s demise can backfire, supremely. And in his highly restrained references to American culpability in WWII, Putin may be implying that Russia will defend the United States from overeager European depredation.
Truthfully, given what happened in WWII, I can’t imagine any European nation accepting the continuation of the USA in it’s present form. I would expect they’d all want to see it chopped up into a collection of less threatening pieces. IMO.
Here is the hyperlink to the six webpage article written by President Putin and published on the National Interest Internet website.
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/vladimir-putin-real-lessons-75th-anniversary-world-war-ii-162982
U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill stated respectfully in formal address of the heroic effort and supreme sacrifice of the Soviet Red Army to defeat the Nazi fascists.
“On April 28, 1942, Franklin D. Roosevelt said in his address to the American nation: “These Russian forces have destroyed and are destroying more armed power of our enemies – troops, planes, tanks, and guns – than all the other United Nations put together”. Winston Churchill in his message to Joseph Stalin of September 27, 1944, wrote “that it is the Russian army that tore the guts out of the German military machine…”
It would further the education of English-speaking peoples to learn from period documents contained in the electronic database Pamyat Naroda of what Russian soldiers and civilians went through during the prolonged suffering in their daily lives.
As an aside, here is a hyperlink to the two-hour long movie with English subtitles produced in 2010 about the siege of Brest Fortress located in Belarus during Operation Barbarossa.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lw3mDJ0qdp0
Dear PokeTheTruth,
Thank you for this. Russia had to pay a very heavy price in blood and treasure to be “accepted” by the West for a couple of years. But even that was much better than what the Nazis had in mind for the Russians.
What the Mongols did to the Russians was much better that what the “Christians” had in mind for the Russians. The “Christians,” includes the Pope in 1000 AD, Napoleon, and the mustache. The “Christians” wanted to annihilate Russia.
Dear Charles,
Amen. I’m not sure why it is so difficult to see for some.
Yes, I live in the West but there is no justification.
In this article, Andre Vltchek writes that “All non-white continents were occupied, plundered and enslaved; all, without a single exception. But it was always done “for the good of the victims”, or “in order to protect them” (most likely from themselves)”
The full article can be found here:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/aggressive-behaviour-of-britains-foreign-secretary-boris-johnson-in-moscow-agony-of-a-rotting-empire/5624020
All I can say is,
“God help Putin & the Russian people,
& all the rest of us that the Anglo-Zionist Word Order targets”.
PS: buckle your seatbelts, it’s gonna be a VERY bumpy ride!
Dear Maiden,
May God protect us all.
Thank you for this perspective.
Putin’s history lesson article did have me scratching my head as to why he felt the need to give a history lecture as if to recalcitrant students. This has provided the context.
Maybe this also explains the goings on between China and India on their border. India would be a big prize to whichever side it joins.
Dear Jiri,
Thank you very much. Re China and India, there is nothing more natural than for the two giants to join hands with Russia. Three genuine non-western civilisations in a friendly embrace. But it is not going to happen that easily. The same people who are attacking China are trying to butter up Modi. I hope that wisdom will prevail.
A forlorn hope since Modi has sold out to the hegemon. He is being used!
Yes, war is coming. To those who are bringing it about, you don’t understand what Russia is, and how she fights. Russia knows who you are, where you are and what you’re doing. Sleep soundly… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f8WYvAo-RA
Hi Mr. Ken Leslie,
Thank you once again for another very insightful article. Please keep on writing.
You mentioned the word “blowback” in your article and I cannot help but equate it with Karmic Justice. The way I see it, what is happening in the US, the UK and the rest of NATO is Karmic Justice coming to collect her dues. It seems the western world does not accept the concept of Karmic Justice who is the greatest bitch of them all. Let Her sword fall where it is supposed to.
Dear Chaucer,
Thank you for your encouragement. You are correct, it’s just that I use “blowback” in the context in which historian Cristopher Simpson used it to describe the negative consequences for America of the use of Nazis and their collaborators during the Cold War. Karmic (or cosmic) justice does sound better but I’m not sure I’m in the position to judge.
Correct me if I am wrong…. were not the Furies of ancient Greece the equivalent of Karmic retribution returning to avenge evil carried out…… a very old and honourable idea.
Thanks for this excellent summary. I had a very similar take on Putin’s article.
As for Churchill, let’s recall that he also deliberately starved to death several million Indians during WWII. His ‘marriage of temporary convenience’ to Russia was to save his own skin when he miscalculated Germany’s intentions.
Why would Germany NOT want to finish off the UK after Perfidious Albion did its best to destroy Germany?
The fact that Churchill was so perfidious that after praising Russia for saving the UK, by absorbing most of the violence of the Wehrmacht, he would use the Wehrmacht and try to reinvade the USSR, his socalled ally, indicates a serious psychological problem.
He is not to be praised, simply because he didn’t give a darn about the USSR, except to keep Hitler from doing to the UK what Hitler did to Poland and Belarus and the USSR.
Changing tack, I recently watched “The Unknown War”, a made for TV series narrated by Burt Lancaster in 1978. It’s probably one of the most even handed treatments of the Great Patriotic War by the West. And its final episode says pretty much what Putin said in his article. It even includes such a Wall Street snake as Averell Harriman, urging peaceful coexistence, an entreaty by Brezhnev, and a short clip from JFK all saying the same thing: To honor the USSR for its role and urging peace.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vQSZar84DQ&list=PLr7tdO3Zp0VFhTUH2LD9NYPzBh9uc3Kxb&index=20
Dear Subhuti,
Thank you. You are right to raise these points. I am not arguing for the moral supremacy of one imperialism vs. another. I am just pointing out that the British and the Americans, unlike the Germans, HAVE NOT YET COMMITTED THE ULTIMATE MISTAKE. The Germans had more than one chance to co-exist peacefully with Russia/Soviet Union, yet they chose war. It’s a constant–irrespective of who was pulling the strings in the background.
Thanks for “The Unknown War”. There was also “World at War”–pretty objective and historically correct. From these, we can see how much Russophobia has been stoked by the dark forces in the West.
Has always been a given, at least from my perspective in the Netherlands.
All my life, Russia Russia Russia awful and worse than bad.
Interestingly it has been tory harpy Theresa May who IMO gave this the fitting description
“rules based order”.
1. There are rules we follow, there is consensus 2. Rules we make and break as we please
3. Thus order is established.
Rules Based Order describes the behaviour of the pack of hyena’s that form NATO
and its policies of Strategy Of Tension, R2P and operation Gladio to a T. Threats! Security!!
“Although Stalin has not been fully rehabilitated, his role in saving the Soviet Union and freeing the world from the fascist beast is slowly being recognised and re-evaluated.”
This statement, and in line with Putin’s brief remarks on Stalin in his article, could do with some substantial historian’s, writers and journalists’s links to back it up. It is made with great authority, so much the better, but what does it rest on actually, hopefully not the interests of the prevailing, western styled re-writers of history ?
Dear Joyce,
Thank you, I agree. This should be a job for historians and not hacks like Robert Conquest and many others. I think from my lowly perspective, it is sufficient to see that Stalin is hardly reviled in Russia (and even the West) these days and always comes close to the top of any list of the greatest Russians (although he was not one!).
I am not defending Stalin and like president Putin am very much aware of Stalin’s dark side. Nevertheless, at a time when the world is lurching towards another war, it is important to restore some balance. After all, president Putin is the principal defender of the Red Army–and by implication, its Commander-in-Chief. And he has all the documentation he needs.
Thank you for your reply KL, the range of your subject is topical, controversial, and extensive, and if I may ask, on what background reading do you base the assumption that Robert Conquest is a hack writer ?
In the world of rewritten and ‘re-writing in progress’ history, what documents do we need, what proof in anything whatsoever ? First hand experience and knowledge are to be deservedly respected, but how does the course of time possibly change the dynamics of what has passed, it may well do, and then we need to take account of this fact, especially, as you say, when we are in the midst of dire circumstances.
But what are these significant changes, how can we assess them, have they indeed happened even, and how else will we know, other other than with true discernment ?
Unfortunately, I am unconvinced by your reply, and feel that any article making statements in the manner that you have, needs to be either well referenced, or contain that gravitas of political opinion born of wide research and reading, respect for authors of merit, that so often marks writers and journalists on this site.
It seems to me that to remain objective in discussion, links would first have needed to be provided.
The sad reality it’s that as long as US exists there will be no peace on Earth.
Unless the Americans grow some cojones and take on the traitors and dual citizens who have taken over their government
Before I start my rebuttal of much that has been written here, I would like to go back to December 25th. 1916, on the Western Front, where the German soldiers started singing Christmas Carols, and then the British joined in. Arthur Zimmermann had proposed a ‘peace settlement’ but Lloyd George, even with the threat of bankruptcy refused the offer as they had not yet taken Palestine.
The name calling of one’s enemies is well known, and the common name these days are the normal; capitalists, communist, fascists and so on, but most of these do not go to the battlefields to fight and die. But who was it that financed Trotsky and his 300 from New York, via Nova Scotia, and Lenin who travelled by train across Germany, and what happened to the gold in the Russian banks; oh yes, what did happen to that gold!
I have no real respect for ‘Papa Joe’ with his pipe, nor do I have any respect for the well paid for drunkard Winston Churchill who was always a war-monger and a coward, and I have scant respect for the lying murdering KDR who with Churchill’s permission set up the Japanese for Pearl Harbour in which the first innocent Americans died. And I wonder what truth that Hess held when he flew to England and what it was that killed the Duke Of Kent, and whatever happened to Neville Chamberlain who Churchill replaced at the end of the ‘Phoney War’!
But behind all of this is the number of people who died during this period of deceit and lies, frequently called propaganda, but much better know today as ‘Spin’. We have been lied to frequently in regards to the end of WW1 being instrumental in the start of WW2, but it is the very same people who are again active in preparing for WW3.
After the ‘Treaty of Versailles’ in which the number of Jews was well noted, we had the ‘League of Nations’ which didn’t last, but again, Stalin, Churchill and FDR resurrected this ‘World Parliament’ in 1945 called the United Nations, and why, even Rockefeller donated the land in New York City for the UN HQ. It has also been noted that the WHO has worked hand in hand with the CIA since 1947, and with todays events, being the Corona Virus 19, that corroboration is still apparent.
It has even been stated that the recent collapse of the stock market was parallel with the 1929 collapse, and the events afterwards are again so similar that the future war scenario is extremely grim. As the ‘Great Depression’ led to WW2, it appears that this Corona Virus Event will likewise lead to WW3.
And again and again, Putin warns us of these possibilities, and the probable outcomes in which the innocent will be murdered and the guilty will be well protected in their little bolt-holes.
It is interesting to note the role played by Benjamin Netanyahu who appeared at 911 as well as in London for 7/7 where he stated he had been forewarned, but Sharon still sacked him for his indiscretions. In the following power struggle between these two, Sharon lost and Netanyahu still survives, and some Rabbis have considered him to be the New Messiah. Very interesting, but it only adds to the warnings given by Putin, which of course will be ignored by our well-bought leaders.
At this time the Empire is making their move against China. Its called the pivot to Asia. Eastern Europe and Poland and the Ukraine could be just head fakes. The Empire knows that it cannot survive a first strike against Russia. But China only has about 200 nukes. The Empire has placed about a thousand nukes near China, like Australia, SK, Japan, the Philippines.
The NK regime is working for the spook agency. Otherwise the regime falls. When they test a nuke or launch a missile, they are taking orders from the spooks. The Empire does this to justify increased military spending, and the THAADs placed in SK are targeting China, not NK. Japan will also have a new advanced anti-missile system.
The plan is to launch a surprise attack against China with a 5 to 1 advantage in nuclear missiles and then shoot down enough of China’s missiles headed for the U.S. to make the first strike survivable. Then all China can do is destroy Japan and the world economy, but the Empire has shown that it is not worried about the world economy as demonstrated by their manufactured COVID crisis which was set up to justify a war against China. The biggest thing that can wrong with the plan is how Russia will react, because they know that they will be next.
As always, Westerners won’t betray their Imperialist Fatherland by defending the DPRK. The DPRK has resisted Western imperialism as only a few others have. The nonsense about the DPRK being controlled by the West is a very obvious and stupid case of projection.
@Charles Carroll
“The Empire has placed about a thousand nukes near China, like Australia, SK, Japan, the Philippines.”
Regarding the Philippines, a few months ago its president denied the presence of anything nuclear from the US. But he can be lying. As for the inhabitants of the Philippines, almost all of them are incapable of critical thinking; they have been brainwashed thoroughly by its former colonizer (US). They view the US as their savior and best friend. Yes, they worship the US with an ardour you have not seen. Their reserved currency is in US dollars, as in everything. Yes, that’s how they love uncle shmuel.
That almost reminds me of an RT article I read of Japan’s increased militarization (or something like that; I can’t really remember). One of the commentators, who lives in the Philippines, found this worrying (understandably given the circumstances of Japan’s conquest of the Philippines during WWII). I wonder if he/she is aware that this is being done at the behest of the USA.
It might be that all of this patient education on Putin’s part is so that people who have clear minds in the future will understand why Russia had to do to Poland what it did when NATO put nukes there.
should that happen.
The A-Z empire are either complete lunatics, or at least governed by complete lunatics, to even contemplate a war against another nuclear power; moreover one equipped with the most modern and formidable nuclear strike weapons. Additionally, Russia after being attacked has a second strike potential so that makes a ‘winnable’ nuclear war clearly impossible. Most rational people know this, and I suspect most Americans are also aware.
But you never know, the Americans capacity to believe their own bullshit is legendary, or maybe the whole thing could just be a monumental bluff. If they are going to pick a fight they must do so in the knowledge that their opponent has ample resources to fight back.
What a crazy world.
Dear Francis,
I’ve been wondering about that. I’m sure our host must have addressed this mindless brinkmanship. They are probably hoping to weaken Russia by a thousand cuts and render it incapable of protecting its interests. Hence the total war which includes constant threats.
Thank you
Dear Teranam,
Pretty much. You summarise it well.
Thanks
Great article thanks
Hi, JJ,
Thanks!
Yes Putin must be listened to.
He is an astute man with a great knowledge and a peace seeker.
Unlike the Empire which seeks to profit from war and conflict in its endless greed.
One must understand that commercial interests in US & UK on the far right financed the EU facists between WW1&2 to have WW2 so they could then have $ billions directed to them from 1939-45 so come in and both wreck and save those entities, with them also making out they were saviors of humanity. The facists looted the east during their occupation and the whole process ran the USSR into debt.
Certain people made a lot of money out of this and nothing has changed.
The same racket still exists.
Is it any wonder Putin and his people are cautious ?
Trump appears not to want to follow that path and that is why he is being attacked.
War is not good for business.
Co-operation is.
V. Putin is without a doubt the world’s most intelligent and peace-loving head of state these days, and I am very grateful for his careful revisiting of the Alleinschuld ban on my country, Germany. And yet, and yet … Yes, the Red Army beat the Wehrmacht and thus “freed the world from the yoke of fascism” or whatever way one likes to put this. The problem: It works the other way round as well. Hitler (and many, many voluntary battalions from nearly all European countries) tried to save the world from the yoke of communism – and they failed, and quite a number of Eastern European countries were worse off for it.
And: I am convinced that in early Summer ’41 Stalin was preparing to march West. –
I love Russia, I admire Putin and I want nothing but peace. But real peace can’t be had without the truth. Putin has dared to take an amazing step with this article, but why in the world would he so strongly identify with the USSR? Doesn’t that prolong a historical difficulty that could easily be dealt with?
Dear Martin,
I love German language, philosophy, music etc. However…
– Why did Germany start a war with Russia twice in 30 years? How many years after Lake Peipus is that? Who has compelled the Hohenzollerns and Hitlerites (and Teutonic knights) to rush eastward? Since its formation, Germany has been an anti-Russian empire. Communist or otherwise, Russia was the target. And no, I am not falling for the old – it’s the sneaky British who have MADE the Germans attack Russia. There is no excuse, forgive but never forget.
– Second, had Stalin wished to do to Germany one hundredth of what the Germans have done to Russia, there would have been no Germany. Period.
– It was the British and the French who wanted Germany ripped apart. Stalin wouldn’t allow it. It was Margaret Thatcher and the French who were queasy about German reunification. The Russians made it possible. If I were you I would be forever grateful. There is no historical difficulty – Russia has been crippled possibly forever by a German Crusade.
Thank you
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t there once an idea of a German-Russian economic and political alliance – something Bismarck advocated in the 19th century – that Britain attempted to sabotage?
Thanks, Joey.
Not sure about that. Bismarck is controversial and there are many things that people ascribe to him. Perhaps I exaggerated a bit but the point is clear. It is interesting that one of his descendants was in Moscow in 1945 as a leader of the anti-Nazi fraction of German officers. It was also Bismarck who allegedly said that Russia would cease to be an empire if it lost Ukraine.
I am not saying that there was never a potential for peaceful coexistence. Germans have had a huge impact on Russian history – within Russia and not all bad. For example, the great patriarch of the ROC Alexy II was German by birth. Russia and Prussia had fairly good relations until well into the 20th century (even after unification).
However, the idea of German nationalism is almost always directed towards the East. There are psychological explanations for this but perhaps another time. Of course, Britain would sabotage anything that worked against its interests – but Germany DID NOT HAVE TO ATTACK RUSSIA TWICE. How can I make this any clearer?
It is not about people, it is about an ideology honed over seven centuries.
Dear Joey,
Shall we then agree that the enmity between the two nations started with the failure of Bismarck’s Kulturkampf – his attempt to limit the influence of Roman Catholicism on German culture and politics?
KL, thanks for your respectful reply. The problem I have is mainly with your first point. Germany DID NOT start two wars against Russia. Please re-read your history of WW I – it was Russia who attacked. And while 1941 was much more complicated, there are clear signs that Hitler was just a matter of weeks or even days quicker than Stalin.
Once more: My aim is not to blame anyone, it’s just that you probably don’t have the faintest idea of what carrying ALL THE BLAME for WW I AND WW II has done to my country. Trust me, you don’t.
Sorry, I forgot the criminal role of Germany (and the Vatican) in the dismemberment the former Yugoslavia and taking part in the criminal bombing campaign over Serbia in 1999. Many nations are guilty but for Germany to do something like this after all the harm it has done is unforgivable – and hasn’t been forgotten.
Well, no way to put this into any more favorable light … except that – yes, it has been said before – since 1945 Germany hasn’t been a sovereign country; 1999 it acted as the NATO pawn it is. It’s not like the people have been asked about this – a clear majority would have been against any involvement in this.
Thanks, Martin
There was no NATO in 1914 or 1941. Then, they were just obeying orders. The majority were against the war (not). My point is that the Slavs fared much worse when Germany WAS NOT “occupied”. You see, the Greeks are in NATO as well but they engaged in mass protests and sabotage.
Another useful analysis of President Putin’s article is here
Everytime someone uses the word “racist” unironically and uncritically, they reify the power of Anglo-Zionism.