• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    GORGworld conspiracy // 911 // free world order! ... part 5 ::
    KAJJAK
    KAJJAK --- ---
    GORG:

    francie a nemecko se k rusku chovaly ze startu konfliktu na ukrajine uplne stejne, svuj pristup zmenily z casti jen na zaklade verejneho mineni uvnitr vlastnich zemi...

    stejne tak treba svycarsko nebo rakousko chtely zachovat svou neutralitu a do niceho se nesrat, to se ted z casti take meni... Takze historicke analogie tam jsou velike, jen je pro svou zaslepenost nevidis nebo nechces videt...
    OMNIHASH
    OMNIHASH --- ---
    GORG: eh cože co? Kdy a jak útočili Ukrajinci na Krym?
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    Dokazu si predstavit analogii hodne obecnou, ze ted treba jedni nechteji veci eskalovat, aby z toho nebyl svetovy konflikt.. a druzi by radsi se do toho vojensky montovali, protoze kdysi s nacisty se jakoze taky udajne snazilo o nevojenske reseni.

    Na tech konkretnich udalostech moc podobnosti nenajdem, ale rekneme ze tyhle dva postoje by se daly uvazovat, ze v urcitym principu se resi pasivita vs aktivita.

    (Sic jak rikam.. i v tehle rovine proste Mnichov byl o necem jinem. Tehdy Britove primo Nemce zjevne podporovali.. nejak prizni ale i financne. Aby spolu s Nemci zautocili na Rusko. Nekdo by to ted mohl namotat na to, ze Putinovu zlu ted platime za plyn, a pokud chceme analogii znasilnit, tak muzeme uvazovat i takhle, ze topenim v CR vlastne "podporujeme" Hitlera stejne jako Britove tehdy financovali Hitlera.. sic je otazka kolik % prijmu Ruska je z prodeje plynu CR )

    Osobne mi spis prijde, ze v CR mizi svoboda pod tlakem Zapadu. A to je otevrene priznavano. Cenzura a ta obhajoba utoku na Rusko za pomoci propagandy, militarismus , fetisismus tanku a zbrani pro boj za mir. My uz tim agresivnim elementem jsme. Poslali jsme tanky, udelali sankce.. a stejne jakoby to nestaci, stejne se to prezentuje jako pasivita. Meni se v CR zakony kolem dezinformaci.. vznika tlak na jakesi umlceni svobodne diskuze. To spis mi pripomina nacisty.. nez tyhle militaristicke analogie.
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    KAJJAK: Rusko vzneslo uzemni pozadavky na Moldavsko pod podhruzkami vojenskeho utoku?

    Kdysi Nemci meli uzemni naroky na Ceskoslovensko. Zapad jim CS tehdy radeji bez boje predal. A to byly explicitni pozadavky, ze dejte nam uzemi nebo se pripravte na valku. Rusko ted nic takoveho nedelalo, a ze zautocili na Ukrajinu, prekvapilo vsechny. Nejvetsi moznou podobnost vidim v anexi Krymu, ze ten mu jako svet "nechal" bez vojenske odpovedi. Ale Krym Rusku nikdo nedal... vtrhli tam armadou a odstepili ho od Ukrajiny. Zadne podazavky "Dejte nam Krym, jinak tam vtrhnem" Rusko nevzneslo. Takze jim ho nikdo nedaval a oni tam proste sli jakoze branit Rusy proti udajnemu teroru prekvapivou operaci.
    Mnichovska zrada byla o tom, ze Zapad tehdy Ceskoslovensko proste prinutil, aby se Nemcu vzdali bez boje. Zadnou takovou analogii ke Krymu nemame...to se odehralo mezi temi dvema staty.

    Pak 8 let k nasemu povetsinou nezajmu Ukrajina utocila na Krym. Zadnou analogii k WW2 v tomhle pripade nenajdem.

    No moje retro kolem Mnichova je prave i dost o tom, ze i nase povedomi o mnichovske dohode je navic zjevne dost mimo. Nemci meli explicitni pozadavky a Francie a Britanie CS pres diplomaticky natlak donutili se Nemcum bez valky podridit. Nemecko pak sebralo nasi pokrocilejsi armadu, kterou pak mohli pouzit na sve tazeni. Kazdopadne Nemci jasne pozadavali ta uzemi a jasne jinak vyhrozovali, ze si to vezmou valkou. Do posledni chvile naopak Rusko vylucovalo utok na Ukrajinu. A na Krymu to mel byt nejaky incident na dovolene nejakych Rusu.

    Kazdopadne ja pisu, co by prislo znepokojive pro me jako potvrzujici plan dobyt Evropu - utok nebo pozadovani uzemi pod pohruzkou utoku Slovenska, Madarska nebo Polska. Resp. i kdyby to nebylo uplne explicitne, tak presun boju nebo nejakych rozbroju do tehle statu uz by mi prislo divny. Samozrejme pokud by Slovensko zaclo ted se do Ukrajiny montovat vojensky, by samozrejme mohla byt ruska reakce ospravedlnitelna. Tedy pokud by Slovensko nejen jak ted dodavame tam zbrane se primo angazovalo v bojich.. Ale to by se opet odchylovalo od toho WW2 scenare.. na Nemce nikdo neutocil.
    KAJJAK
    KAJJAK --- ---
    valky v gruzii a cecensku jsme jako evropa moc neresili a ukrajinu si putin myslel ze mu predhodime, kdyz ji otestoval pres krym... Ja tam tu analogii vidim velikou... Ukrajina se v ocich rusu mela vzdat proti domnele silnejsimu nepriteli stejne tak jak sme to pred lety udelali my... Ukrajina je ale (stejne jako my tehdy) silnejsi nez se to zapadu sprvu zdalo, stejne tak, jako bychom asi byli my kdybychom nakonec bojovali s Nemeckem... Kdyz by se nam darilo jako ukrajincum, taky by nas postupne dozbrojovali aby valka nesla dal...
    KAJJAK
    KAJJAK --- ---
    GORG:

    rusko uplne v pohode mluvilo o moldavsku jako o dalsim moznem cili pro "osvobozeni", to ze se sralo do gruzie a cecenska bud nevis, nebo si statecne odignoroval... Takze neni pravda cela tva veta "Rusko zadne naroky na jine okolni staty nevyjadruje."

    Vyjadruje je nejen slovne, ale i ciny...
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    mezitim v tichosti ceskych medii pred par dny vyhodili tu ukrajinskou ombucmanku Denisovou ze sveho mista, protoze si ukrajinsti novinari v hromadnem apelu stezovali na to, ze necitlive siri obvineni ze znasilnovani Rusu na svem facebooku namisto, aby se snazila pomahat, nebo se starala o zajisteni dukazu

    prestoze tahle Ljudmila Denisová byla castym zdrojem pro ceska media ruznych tvrzeni o znasilnovani na Ukrajine, tak tuhle informaci se zjevne rozhodli vedome nezverejnit.

    The Verkhovna Rada fired Ombudsperson Denisova | Ukrayinska Pravda
    https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/05/31/7349678/

    У Раді зібрали голоси для висловлення недовіри омбудсману Денісовій - ''Слуга народу'' | Українська правда
    https://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2022/05/31/7349628/

    Why Ukraine′s human rights chief Lyudmila Denisova was dismissed | Europe | News and current affairs from around the continent | DW | 03.06.2022
    https://www.dw.com/en/why-ukraines-human-rights-chief-lyudmila-denisova-was-dismissed/a-62017920
    He also accuses her of having focused too much on media work, and on describing sexually motivated crimes in gratuitous detail as well as the raping of children in occupied territories. However, some of these accounts, he said, had not been verified, which had harmed Ukraine's reputation and distracted media attention from other, proven crimes and problems.

    ...

    Many Ukrainian journalists and human rights activists were outraged when they read Denisova's detailed descriptions on her Facebook account.

    "We are forced to trust the official information that comes from officials, in a state of martial law a priori.

    We do not have the opportunity to verify it from other sources. In this way, we are spreading messages from the Commissioner for Human Rights - in fact, taking them on faith, " said Tatiana Troshchynska, editor-in-chief of Public Radio.

    The media also point out that the ombudsman uses unethical wording to describe the details of the occupiers' horrific crimes.

    These are the following formulations:

    "girl 6 months old, Russians raped with a teaspoon",
    "Two children were raped orally and anal,"
    "A nine-month-old daughter was raped by candlelight."


    "Sexually motivated crimes during wartime are a tragedy, but they should not be the subject of a kind of 'chronicle of scandal'," an open letter penned by 140 activists, media professionals, lawyers, psycologists and other public figures stated.

    In addition, media outlets are concerned that the Ukrainian media may be just a platform for spreading "horrible details" about Russian sexual crimes during the war. And they should serve as voices of support, in particular to gather evidence in relevant criminal cases against the occupiers.



    Ljudmila Denisová: Rusové mučili a znásilňovali děti - CNN Prima NEWS
    https://cnn.iprima.cz/ukrajinska-ombudsmanka-rusove-mucili-a-znasilnovali-deti-zajate-vojacky-svlekali-89435
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    jinak ke kauze masovych hrobu mame medialni twist...

    Mariupol: Satellite images suggest mass graves dug near besieged city - BBC News
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61183056
    Local Ukrainian officials accuse the Russians of burying Mariupol civilians killed by Russian troops there.

    udajne je fakt kopou Rusove

    Russian Troops Make Ukrainians Dig Graves for Food: Mariupol Mayor
    https://www.businessinsider.com/russians-make-ukrainians-dig-graves-return-for-food-mariupol-mayor-2022-4
    "We know about these mass graves because these fascists — I have no other words — are enlisting local people for burial for food," Mariupol Mayor Vadym Boychenko said in a statement posted on the city council's Telegram.

    "They told us that it is necessary to 'work hard' to give you food and water," he added. "Now Mariupol does not have enough humanitarian aid so people are forced to do it."

    Insider could not independently verify Boychenko's claims.

    a dalsi verze je, ze Rusove nuti Ukrajince kopat ty hroby vymenou za jidlo

    to je hodne flip-flop od puvodnich zprav mediich ze u Mariupolu a jinde kopou mistni Ukrajinci bez jakehokoliv donucovani mass graves, protoze nemaji elektrinu v krematoriu, resp. kvuli ostrelovani nemuzou ta tela moc volne premistovat

    media se nahle tvari, ze o necem takovem nikdy neslyseli.
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    Military leaders saw pandemic as opportunity to test propaganda techniques, report says | Ottawa Citizen
    https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/military-leaders-saw-pandemic-as-unique-opportunity-to-test-propaganda-techniques-on-canadians-forces-report-says
    The federal government never asked for the so-called information operations campaign, nor did cabinet authorize the initiative developed during the COVID-19 pandemic by the Canadian Joint Operations Command, then headed by Lt.-Gen. Mike Rouleau.

    But military commanders believed they didn’t need to get approval from higher authorities to develop and proceed with their plan, retired Maj.-Gen. Daniel Gosselin, who was brought in to investigate the scheme, concluded in his report.

    The propaganda plan was developed and put in place in April 2020 even though the Canadian Forces had already acknowledged that “information operations and targeting policies and doctrines are aimed at adversaries and have a limited application in a domestic concept.”

    ...

    The plan devised by the Canadian Joint Operations Command, also known as CJOC, relied on propaganda techniques similar to those employed during the Afghanistan war. The campaign called for “shaping” and “exploiting” information. CJOC claimed the information operations scheme was needed to head off civil disobedience by Canadians during the coronavirus pandemic and to bolster government messages about the pandemic.

    Military campaign to influence public opinion continued after defence chief shut it down | CBC News
    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/psychological-warfare-influence-campaign-canadian-armed-forces-1.6079084
    Portions of a military information campaign meant to influence the Canadian public during the COVID-19 pandemic continued to operate months after the chief of the defence staff at the time ordered it shut down in the spring of 2020, CBC News has learned.

    The Canadian military recently conducted four reviews of controversial initiatives. A copy of one of those reviews was obtained by CBC News under access to information legislation.

    That review shows that even after the then-chief of the defence staff, Jonathan Vance, verbally called off the overall influence campaign in April 2020, some influence activities aimed at Canadians carried on for another six months — until Vance issued a written edict in November 2020.

    "The public affairs, [civil-military cooperation] and influence activities that were taking place, particularly within [Joint Task Force Central], did not stop," says the review document, which looked at the origins of the influence campaign.

    ...

    The military is permitted to run psychological operations while deployed abroad — but it is prohibited from doing so in Canada without specific permission from the federal cabinet.

    DND insists the activities undertaken to monitor and shape public discourse as it related to the pandemic did not constitute psychological operations

    ...

    Crying wolf
    The military launched another investigation after a reserve unit specializing in information warfare conducted a propaganda training exercise in September, 2020 in Nova Scotia involving a fake letter warning of grey wolves wandering around

    ...
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    Google has fired the engineer whose anti-diversity memo reflects a divided tech culture - Vox
    https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/8/8/16106728/google-fired-engineer-anti-diversity-memo
    One engineer reportedly wrote that the memo had caused “irreparable harm … to 1000s of Googlers,” and that “going forward, I cannot — and I will not — work with James Damore.” He went on to detail the ways in which he would not engage with or interact with Damore, his code, or his product development.

    On Saturday, Danielle Brown, Google's recently appointed vice president of diversity, responded to Damore’s memo and the backlash it generated via an internal memo to employees. Brown unequivocally dismissed Damore’s arguments, noting, “Like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I'm not going to link to it here as it's not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.”

    Declaring that Google is “unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company," she went on to assert that all employees with “alternative views, including different political views, [should] feel safe sharing their opinions.” “But,” she added, “that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.”

    Google Fires Author of Divisive Memo on Gender Differences - Bloomberg
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo

    // pro pripomenuti, jak tu OMNIHASH siril konspiracni teorii, dezinformaci a hoax, ze tyhle diverzitni veci jsou pouze o tom, ze jednou v roce se sebehne parta altsexualu.
    Tenhle pripad je ukazkovy priklad, ze ten pochod institucemi a korporacemi dospel takove miry, ze clovek muze prijit o zamestnani
    tedy se OMNIHASH velmi plete, kdyz pise, ze tohle se neprojevuje jinak nez pride festem... evidentne o pripadu Damora nikdy neslysel.. nebo sem chodi trollit
    fskutecnosti prave ted probiha v parlamentu debata o novelizaci kolem svateb.
    ARRAKIS
    ARRAKIS --- ---
    The Top 10 Creepiest & Most Dystopian Things Pushed By The World Economic Forum | ZeroHedge
    https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/top-10-creepiest-and-most-dystopian-things-pushed-world-economic-forum-wef

    pekne shrnuti, jak se o nas WEF krasne stara
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    Tragedy and Hope - Wikipedia
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_and_Hope

    http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/Tragedy_and_Hope.pdf
    Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time is a work of history written by former Georgetown University professor and historian Carroll Quigley. The book covers the period of roughly 1880 to 1963 and is multidisciplinary in nature though perhaps focusing on the economic problems brought about by the First World War and the impact these had on subsequent events. While global in scope, the book focuses on Western civilization.

    The book has attracted the attention of those interested in geopolitics due to Quigley's assertion that a secret society initially led by Cecil Rhodes, Alfred Milner and others had considerable influence over British and American foreign policy in the first half of the twentieth century. From 1909 to 1913, Milner organized the outer ring of this society as the semi-secret Round Table groups.[1]

    The book is written based on archived files from the Council on Foreign Relations.
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    Dr. Quigley explains how Germany in 1938 conquered a then more powerful Czechoslovakia - An exchange of correspondence between Mr. Jay Burke and Dr. Carroll Quigley
    http://www.carrollquigley.net/misc/Quigley_explains_how_Germany_conquered_Czechoslovakia.htm
    Faculty Corner
    The Courier, December 12, 1952



    For the Faculty Corner this week, the Courier has been fortunate in obtaining permission to print an exchange of correspondence between Mr. Jay Burke, a student in the Georgetown College of Arts and Sciences, and Dr. Carroll Quigley of the School of Foreign Service. We are indebted to both parties for this permission.





    Dr. Carroll Quigley
    Department of History, School of Foreign Service


    My dear Dr. Quigley:

    My name is Jay Burke and I am a student at Georgetown University. I am writing in regard to a discussion I have had with a student of yours, James Dowling. It is his assertion that prior to the outbreak of hostilities in 1939, at the time Germany took over Czechoslovakia, Germany had only 36 incomplete divisions while Czechoslovakia had 35 complete and well trained divisions. In Dowling's own words, "The Czech troops were ordered out of the trenches," shortly before the treacherous invasion of the Germans.

    Obviously the Czech army was more potent than the German army. If this is so, why was Germany able to conquer Czechoslovakia so easily, and why didn't the Czechs resist?

    It is my contention that Germany had more than 36 incomplete divisions to conquer a country of 35 complete divisions. Mr. Dowling contends that Germany had but 36 divisions plus their reserves.

    Would you please give us the truth of the matter?

    Respectfully yours,

    Jay Burke




    Mr. Jay Burke
    Box 113, Georgetown University
    Washington 7, D.C.


    My dear Mr. Burke,

    Mr. Dowling's statement, regarding the size of the German Army at the time of the Munich crisis of September 1938, is quite accurate. In the third week of September Czechoslovakia had a million men and thirty-four first-rate divisions under arms. The Germans, in the course of September, increased their mobilization to thirty-one and ultimately to thirty-six divisions; but this probably represented a smaller force than the Czechs, as many of the nineteen first-line divisions were at two-thirds strength, the other third having been withdrawn to form the nucleus for the reserve divisions. Of the nineteen first-line divisions, three were armored and four were motorized. Only five divisions were left on the French frontier, in order to defeat Czechoslovakia as quickly as possible. France, which did not mobilize completely, had the Maginot Line completely manned on a war basis plus more than twenty infantry divisions. Moreover, France had available ten motorized divisions. Finally, Russia had ninety-seven divisions and, according to a letter from President Benes to Professor L. B. Namier on 20 April, 1944, Russia insisted on a policy of resistance to Germany's demands in September, 1938. (See L.B. Namier, Europe in Decay, London, 1950. p. 284.)

    In air power, the Germans had a slight edge in average quality, but in number of planes it was far inferior. Moreover, Britain was just beginning to obtain delivery planes of quality far superior to those of Germany. In September, 1938, Germany had about 1,500 planes, while Czechoslovakia had less than 1,000; France and England together had over 1,000; Russia was reported to have 5,000, mostly of poor quality, but some of high quality. During the crisis, Russia gave thirty-six of its best planes to Czechoslovakia, flying them across Rumania.

    In tanks, Germany was far inferior in quality in September, 1938. At that time, Germany's tanks were all below ten tons (Mark II) and were armed with machine guns, except for a handful of eighteen ton tanks (Mark III) armed with a 37 mm. gun. The Czechs had hundreds of thirty- eight ton tanks armed with 75 mm. cannon. When Germany overran Czechoslovakia in March, 1939, it captured 469 of these superior tanks along with 1,500 planes, 43,500 machine guns, over one million rifles, and a magnificent system of fortifications. From every point of view, this was little less than Germany had at Munich, and, at Munich, if the British government had desired it, Germany (with the possible assistance of Poland and Hungary) would have been opposed by Czechoslovakia supported by France, Britain, and Russia.

    Before leaving this subject, it might be mentioned that Germany, in 1939, brought into production a Mark IV tank of twenty-three tons armed with a 75 mm. cannon but obtained only a handful of these by the outbreak of war. Up to that date (September, 1939), Germany had obtained delivery of only 300 Mark III and Mark IV tanks together. In addition, it had obtained, by the same date, 2,700 of the inferior Mark I and Mark II tanks which suffered break-downs of as much as twenty-five per cent a week. Even in 1939 Germany's production of tanks was less than Britain's. In the first nine months of 1939, Germany produced only fifty tanks a month; in the last four months of 1939, in wartime, Germany produced 247 "tanks and self-propelled guns" compared to British production of 314 tanks in the same period. From 1936 to the outbreak of war in 1939, German aircraft production was not raised but averaged 425 planes a month of all types (including commercial planes). This gave Germany an air force of 1,000 bombers and 1,050 fighters of varying quality in September, 1939. In contrast with this, the British air program of March, 1934 provided for a first-line R.A.F. of 900 planes. This was later increased, at Chamberlain's urging, and the program at May, 1938 planned for a first line force of 2,370 planes. This was increased again in 1939. Under it, Britain produced almost 3,000 "military" planes in 1938 and about 8,000 in 1939. Because of differences in categories between "planes," "military planes," and "combat planes," it is not possible to make any exact comparison of air strength between Britain and Germany, but it is clear that Britain's planes in 1939 and 1940 were more recent and of superior quality than Germany's. It was this superiority which made it possible for Britain to defeat Germany in the "Battle of Britain" in September, 1940.

    The above figures are derived from various sources, mostly official documents. Obviously, the best source for figures on the German Army are in the papers of the German Ministry of War which were captured by the American Army in 1945. At the order of the Secretary of War (Stimson) these archives were studied from this point of view by Major General C.F. Robinson. General Robinson's report, dated 15 October, 1947, is available under the title Foreign Logistical Organizations and Methods (210 pages). At the time I saw this, it was a classified document, and, even now, you may have difficulty obtaining a copy. If so, you will find its contents on this topic summarized in B. Kain's "Germany's Preparation for War," American Economic Review XXXVIII (March 1948), pp. 56-77. These figures on the relative strengths of the German and French armies have recently been supported completely by the French parliamentary investigation into the causes of the 1940 defeat. That the British government was familiar with the situation clear from the recently published papers of the Foreign Office of Great Britain, E.L. Woodward, ed., Documents on British Foreign Policy, 1919-1939, third series, 5 volumes so far published covering 1937-1939. Nevertheless, at that time and since, prominent British political personages such as Lord Halifax, Churchill, and J. Wheeler-Bennett have tried to convey the impression that Germany had overwhelming military force in 1937-1940. This impression has, unfortunately, been generally accepted in America. From the published British documents we can see that the British military attachés in Paris and in Prague protested at the time against this misrepresentation. The most influential element in this campaign of misrepresentation was a statement from Charles A. Lindbergh, issued in Paris at the height of the Czechoslovak crisis, that Germany had 8,000 military planes and could build 1,500 a month. We now know that Germany at that time had 1,500 planes, had built 280 a month in 1938, and had abandoned all plans to bomb London even in a full-scale war because of lack of planes and distance from the target. Lindbergh repeated his talk of woe in London, and the British Government drove its own people to the verge of hysteria by frantically distributing gas-masks, digging worthless slit-trenches in London parks, and releasing rumors of a grave lack of aircraft defenses. Although Lord Halifax, Churchill, and others were informed, about 5 September, 1938, by representatives of the German General Staff and of the German Foreign Office that Hitler would be assassinated by them as soon as he gave the order to attack Czechoslovakia, the British yielded to Hitler and sent ultimatums to Czechoslovakia, to do the the same (See Documents, II, Appendix, and H. Rothfels, The German Opposition to Hitler, Hinsdale, Illinois, 1948, pp. 58-63 and elsewhere). The assassination plot, accordingly, was cancelled at noon on 28 September, 1938. Winston Churchill has continually misrepresented the degree of German armaments and was challenged on this issue by Hanson Baldwin, military critic of The New York Times in that paper on 9 May, 1938. J.W. Wheeler-Bennett in his book, Munich (New York, 1948), says, "By the close of 1937 Germany's preparedness for war was complete... Her rearmament had reached its apogée and could hold that peak level for a certain time..." etc., etc. Mr. Wheeler-Bennett, Britain's outstanding authority on international documentation, was a high official in the Intelligence Department of the Foreign Office during the War, and was, when he wrote his book, the British editor of the captured archives of the German Foreign Ministry. His statements, so far as I know, have never been publicly challenged, and his book is widely accepted as a standard work today. Its interpretation is not supported by the documents which have been published since he wrote, including those published by his organization under the title Documents on German Foreign Policy, 1918-1945, from the Archives of the German Foreign Ministry. Volume II, Germany and Czechoslovakia, 1937-1938, (Washington, 1950).

    The Czechs did not resist in September 1938, as a consequence of a series of ultimatums from London and Paris which stated that if they did not yield they would fight alone. Benes was apparently afraid that if he resisted, he would be supported by Russia; would be attacked simultaneously by Germany, Hungary, and Poland; would be denounced as "a spear-head of Bolshevism in Central Europe" (as he was even after he yielded); and that Britain and France would send aid to Germany to order to drive Germany into a war with the Soviet Union. Since Britain and France did try to attack Russia in January-February, 1940 (at a time when they were technically at war with Germany) and were prevented only by Swedish resistance, there may have been some validity in Benes' fears. On this last point see the documents published by the Swedish Foreign Ministry Forspelet till det tyska angreppet pa Danmark ich Norge den 9 April 1940 (Stockholm, 1947) pp. 153 and 235-236. My own opinion is that if Benes had resisted Germany in 1938 and Germany had attacked, either Hitler would have been removed by his generals or public opinion in France and England would have forced these governments to declare war on Germany. However, none of us knows what might have happened. I assure you it is difficult enough, in the face of propaganda from all sides, to determine what did happen.

    Sincerely,

    Carroll Quigley
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    KAJJAK: Za me ta analogie obzvlast vuci zde zminenemu pokulhava na obe nohy

    1) Kdo je v te analogii soudobe Polsko? Ukrajina?
    V tomhle typu uvahy by jako analogie mohlo byt, ze by Rusko explicitne prohlasovalo, at se Slovensko vzda nekterych uzemi, a my jako ostatni staty bychom rikali Slovensku "Nechte Rusku ta pozadovana uzemi. Zabranime tim valce."
    Nic takoveho se ale nedeje. Rusko zadne naroky na Slovensko ani jine okolni staty nevyjadruje. V pripadne Hitlerova Nemecka tam jasne Nemci vyhrozovali, ze pokud se nepodrobime dobrovolne, tak si to Nemci vezmou silou.

    A Ukrajinu uz masivne vyzbrojujeme, coz se taky nepodoba tehdejsi situaci zjevne...

    Pokud by Rusko vyhrozovalo nebo zacalo s utokem na Slovensko, pak ano.. vojensky uz se to muze podobat moznosti delat ustupky nejakym narokum na uzemi vymenou za zachovani miru, ze bychom mu predhodili Slovensko v ocekavani, ze to Rusku bude stacit (to je v kostce oficialni verze mnichovske dohody)

    2) Cela ta idea o tom, ze tehdy jsme nebyli dostatecne razantni vuci Hitlerovi, takze jakoze budem, a zabranime tomu vcas, pada na tom, ze takhle to ani zjevne ani nebylo. Hitler a rada jinych zapadnich statu byli naopak dost v pratelskych vztazich... cely svet vicemene nemel problem s nacistickymi myslenkami..
    Ostatne pak se aj pridali zejo Italove, Japonci..

    A v podstate cely zapadni blok (Britanie, Francie,..) se rozhodli podporovat Hitlera jako uderne rameno vuci Rusum. Point tady ten postovaneho je, ze Mnichovska dohoda tehdy i dnes je a byla propaganda medii. Ze nas obetovali, protoze jsme udajne nemeli sanci Nemce vojensky odrazit. Kdyz ve skutecnosti tu cteme, ze soubezne podporovali Nemce , protoze nacisty vnimali jako spojence proti Rusku/komunismu. (Podobne USA v 70. letech v Indonesii podporovali obdobu Hitlera, protoze pachal protikomunisticky cistky. Stejna motivace v Koreji, Vietnamu...)

    ---

    Imho relevantni tu k topicu je rozporovat , co jsem postoval o te mnichovske zrade.

    Ostatne tehdy nas zradili Britove a Francouzi... takze ted budeme poucene duverovat Britum a Francouzum? :-)

    Vypada to, ze co se tyce stavu ceskoslovenske armady v 1938, tak to vypada, ze text skutecne popisuje spravne, ze nase armada byla nadrazena schopnostmi te nemecke.

    Jinak vetsina textu je zjevne prepis z knihy Tragedy & Hope od historika Carolla Quigleyho.. konkretne od strany 625.

    Obavam se, ze rada z tech tvrzeni budou zrejme tvrzeni hlavne toho historika, ktery mozna nepujde dolozit (co kdy kdo kde na schuzce rekl, pokud to nebylo soucasti primo nejake korespondence).

    Nicmene vetsi relevanci tomu dodava, ze nejde jen o lecjakeho historika

    Carroll Quigley - Wikipedia
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley

    https://archive.org/stream/4047296CarrollQuigleyTragedyAndHopeAHistoryOfTheWorldInOurTime/4047296-Carroll-Quigley-Tragedy-and-Hope-A-History-of-The-World-in-Our-Time_djvu.txt
    KAJJAK
    KAJJAK --- ---
    GORG: cetl sem prispevek na ktery jsem reagoval, zbytek ne...
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    KAJJAK: ad ta paralela s Ukrajinou: takze si necetl nic z toho, co jsem tu postoval? :)
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    1938 Daily Herald front page reporting the signing of the Munich peace agreement and Chamberlain declares 'It Is Peace For Our Time' Stock Photo - Alamy
    https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-1938-daily-herald-front-page-reporting-the-signing-of-the-munich-peace-72279230.html

    KAJJAK
    KAJJAK --- ---
    spravne hrdy cech by tedy chtel, abychom to tehdy zlym nemcum vytmavili, stejne tak jako chce, aby to zlym rusum vytmavila ukrajina... Protoze co si budem povidat, ze tehdy byli nemci zli a aktualne jsou zli rusi o tom snad nikdo normalni nepochybuje...
    KAJJAK
    KAJJAK --- ---
    GORG:

    me se tam spis libi ta pararela s ukrajinou ve smyslu, ze kdyby se cesi branili a ostatni zeme by jim pomahaly jako ted pomahaji ukrajine, nemusela se valka rozhoret v celoevropskou respektive celosvetovou...

    proste by nemci tehdy pohoreli rovnou u nas stejne tak, jak rusko ted pohorelo na ukrajine a dal uz logicky nepujde...
    GORG
    GORG --- ---
    Heroes or cowards? Czechs in World War II | Radio Prague International
    https://english.radio.cz/heroes-or-cowards-czechs-world-war-ii-8098640
    Czechoslovakia was a major arms manufacturer and had a very modern army of twenty-five divisions. If Hitler carried out his threat and German forces crossed the border, the Czechs would fight, and they thought they had the guaranteed support of the French and the Russians.

    Gordon Skilling was doing research on Czech history in Prague at the time, and also working here at the radio:

    "We, at the time, thought that the resistance was possible and desirable and in fact some of the Czechoslovak generals and some of the political leaders felt the same way. We also hoped, perhaps, that the readiness to resist would deter Nazi Germany from attack. I do remember a great mass meeting, a huge meeting of protest against Germany and Munich, at which leaders of the main pro-resistance parties from the Communists to the nationalists spoke. It was an electric occasion because tens of thousands of Czech workers streamed in through the streets to the square, so there was this readiness to resist. The troops went off to the borders and the planes were ready but unfortunately President Benes decided to capitulate and to give way to the British and French demands."
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam