Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1945 Manchuria Operation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jon Jordan
    replied
    Originally posted by Egorka View Post
    I am personaly aware of the numerous shortcommings of the Stalin regim. IMO, as whole there was more political fredom on the western side of the curtain.

    How do you figure this? Do you mean religious freedom, or freedom of speech, or freedom to elect officials, or economic freedom? I guess I'm not following here - it seemed there was little of any of that during the Stalinst era - help me out on this.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Nobody wants to die but we still would have done it. We were trained and ready for Operation Olympic and we knew how much it would cost. In fact, the medals given out today are the same ones that were ordered for the invasion of Kyushu.
    The decision to ask for Soviet assitance or to use the atom bomb was more because of the Japanese holocaust in China, which was stepped up when they knew that they would lose. Also we knew that, unless tremendous pressure could be brought against them to end the war soon, it would have become the bloodiest war in history for the Japanese - they killed so many of their own subjects in Okinawa, much like the Germans in the final days but on a larger scale.

    Leave a comment:


  • Andrey
    replied
    Originally posted by Cojimar 1945 View Post
    I don't understand why the western allies would want Soviet intervention. The U.S. alone was considerably more powerful than Japan and Soviet involvement seems highly undesirable.
    I think Churchill, Rousevelt and all the US and British militaru leaders knew what they did when they requested the USSR to attack and to do it as soon as possible.

    And I think many Allied seamen/infanrymen/airmen didn't want to die in the end of the war assaulting Kiusiu or Honsiu...
    Last edited by Andrey; 25 Jun 07, 22:05.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cojimar 1945
    replied
    Ussr

    I don't understand why the western allies would want Soviet intervention. The U.S. alone was considerably more powerful than Japan and Soviet involvement seems highly undesirable.

    Leave a comment:


  • joea
    replied
    Originally posted by Egorka View Post
    This is kind of a contradictive statement, do not you think?



    I am personaly aware of the numerous shortcommings of the Stalin regim. IMO, as whole there was more political fredom on the western side of the curtain.

    But one should not bear illusions: the rulling power/elite/establishment will always want to control the situation and direct it's course. Often using the durty technics. And this also applies to the western democracies.
    Yes I agree, as to my first statement I meant you and Andrey were correct. I am sorry about it means I am sorry that dirty tricks interfered with the sovereignty of the nations of Europe after the war. Perhaps though, Europe needed two outside masters to calm it down a bit and rebuild after 2 destructive wars.

    Leave a comment:


  • Egorka
    replied
    Originally posted by joea View Post
    You two are correct, I am sorry to say.
    This is kind of a contradictive statement, do not you think?

    However I am still of the opinion that, at least in France or Italy, one could still be a communist even if there was no hope of getting into power whereas in most Socialist countries no chance after 49 to have any other party exist.
    I am personaly aware of the numerous shortcommings of the Stalin regim. IMO, as whole there was more political fredom on the western side of the curtain.

    But one should not bear illusions: the rulling power/elite/establishment will always want to control the situation and direct it's course. Often using the durty technics. And this also applies to the western democracies.

    Leave a comment:


  • joea
    replied
    You two are correct, I am sorry to say. However I am still of the opinion that, at least in France or Italy, one could still be a communist even if there was no hope of getting into power whereas in most Socialist countries no chance after 49 to have any other party exist. OTOH, it is also clear that most countries that fell behind the Iron Curtain were not what we in the West would call before the war representative democracies except Czechoslovakia so Western style politics may not have worked there after the war either. Most in fact were members of the Axis too boot. Yalta is a big Pandora's box indeed.

    I have studied the Western and Soviet perceptions of the Greek Civil war for my Master's and can say no one EXCEPT Stalin respected his agreements there. (I also mean both Greek factions and neighbouring states as well as the West are responsible for what happened).
    Last edited by joea; 21 Jun 07, 13:07.

    Leave a comment:


  • Andrey
    replied
    When I read all this about Yalta I recall Zhvanetskii's word (Soviet/Russian humourist).

    He spoke that if somebody have not got arguments in a dispute the best way to act is to request the opponent to show his passport

    If it was pp(est) here or one of our Polish "friends" so it would turn into the talkings about Soviet occupation of Estonia and about Katyn correspondingly

    If to speak aout Yalta I really don't see what Stalin violated to say he should do some CERTAIN things and didn't do them. All the sides violated those TOO COMMON decisions of Yalta Conference (remember, for example, Brtish actions in Greece or Allied actions again local Communists in France, Italym Belgium and it is clearly seen Stalin didn't do anything worse).

    Draw your attention, the Soviets attacked the Japanese in Manchuria on August, 9th, right 3 months after the end of the war in Europe!!!! Nobody would said a word against Stalin if he would given a few more days for his troops to prepare better but he ordered to attack exactly in the day in which he had promised to attack!!!

    But I warn you that to begin to speak about Yalta means to open Pandora's Box...

    Leave a comment:


  • Egorka
    replied
    Originally posted by tigersqn View Post
    I see no concerns with regards to Chapter II and the US government actions immediately post-war.

    If you can tell me what you're trying to get at, I could provide an opinion on it.
    I am just curious if there were any countries in Europe where USA conducted undercover operations in order to exclude certain political parties from posibility to form goverment.

    Leave a comment:


  • tigersqn
    replied
    Originally posted by Egorka View Post
    Tigersqn, I understand that you have a grudge on Stalin regarding his fullfilment of these points.

    Do you have any concerns/comments/revelations regarding the action of USA goverment in the area of Europe that was libirated by the Western Allies? Especially in regards to the point 2.

    Regards
    Igor Korenev

    I see no concerns with regards to Chapter II and the US government actions immediately post-war.

    If you can tell me what you're trying to get at, I could provide an opinion on it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Egorka
    replied
    Originally posted by tigersqn View Post
    Yep
    Tigersqn, I understand that you have a grudge on Stalin regarding his fullfilment of these points.

    Do you have any concerns/comments/revelations regarding the action of USA goverment in the area of Europe that was libirated by the Western Allies? Especially in regards to the point 2.

    Regards
    Igor Korenev

    Leave a comment:


  • tigersqn
    replied
    Yep

    Leave a comment:


  • Egorka
    replied
    Originally posted by tigersqn View Post
    Chapters II & VII
    These ones?

    II. DECLARATION OF LIBERATED EUROPE

    The following declaration has been approved:

    The Premier of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the President of the United States of America have consulted with each other in the common interests of the people of their countries and those of liberated Europe. They jointly declare their mutual agreement to concert during the temporary period of instability in liberated Europe the policies of their three Governments in assisting the peoples liberated from the domination of Nazi Germany and the peoples of the former Axis satellite states of Europe to solve by democratic means their pressing political and economic problems.

    The establishment of order in Europe and the rebuilding of national economic life must be achieved by processes which will enable the liberated peoples to destroy the last vestiges of nazism and fascism and to create democratic institutions of their own choice. This is a principle of the Atlantic Charter - the right of all people to choose the form of government under which they will live - the restoration of sovereign rights and self-government to those peoples who have been forcibly deprived to them by the aggressor nations.

    To foster the conditions in which the liberated people may exercise these rights, the three governments will jointly assist the people in any European liberated state or former Axis state in Europe where, in their judgment conditions require, (a) to establish conditions of internal peace; (b) to carry out emergency relief measures for the relief of distressed peoples; (c) to form interim governmental authorities broadly representative of all democratic elements in the population and pledged to the earliest possible establishment through free elections of Governments responsive to the will of the people; and (d) to facilitate where necessary the holding of such elections.

    The three Governments will consult the other United Nations and provisional authorities or other Governments in Europe when matters of direct interest to them are under consideration.

    When, in the opinion of the three Governments, conditions in any European liberated state or former Axis satellite in Europe make such action necessary, they will immediately consult together on the measure necessary to discharge the joint responsibilities set forth in this declaration.

    By this declaration we reaffirm our faith in the principles of the Atlantic Charter, our pledge in the Declaration by the United Nations and our determination to build in cooperation with other peace-loving nations world order, under law, dedicated to peace, security, freedom and general well-being of all mankind.

    In issuing this declaration, the three powers express the hope that the Provisional Government of the French Republic may be associated with them in the procedure suggested.
    .
    .
    .

    VII. POLAND

    The following declaration on Poland was agreed by the conference:

    "A new situation has been created in Poland as a result of her complete liberation by the Red Army. This calls for the establishment of a Polish Provisional Government which can be more broadly based than was possible before the recent liberation of the western part of Poland. The Provisional Government which is now functioning in Poland should therefore be reorganized on a broader democratic basis with the inclusion of democratic leaders from Poland itself and from Poles abroad. This new Government should then be called the Polish Provisional Government of National Unity.

    "M. Molotov, Mr. Harriman and Sir A. Clark Kerr are authorized as a commission to consult in the first instance in Moscow with members of the present Provisional Government and with other Polish democratic leaders from within Poland and from abroad, with a view to the reorganization of the present Government along the above lines. This Polish Provisional Government of National Unity shall be pledged to the holding of free and unfettered elections as soon as possible on the basis of universal suffrage and secret ballot. In these elections all democratic and anti-Nazi parties shall have the right to take part and to put forward candidates.

    "When a Polish Provisional of Government National Unity has been properly formed in conformity with the above, the Government of the U.S.S.R., which now maintains diplomatic relations with the present Provisional Government of Poland, and the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government of the United States of America will establish diplomatic relations with the new Polish Provisional Government National Unity, and will exchange Ambassadors by whose reports the respective Governments will be kept informed about the situation in Poland.

    "The three heads of Government consider that the eastern frontier of Poland should follow the Curzon Line with digressions from it in some regions of five to eight kilometers in favor of Poland. They recognize that Poland must receive substantial accessions in territory in the north and west. They feel that the opinion of the new Polish Provisional Government of National Unity should be sought in due course of the extent of these accessions and that the final delimitation of the western frontier of Poland should thereafter await the peace conference."
    Source: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1945YALTA.html

    Leave a comment:


  • tigersqn
    replied
    Originally posted by Egorka View Post
    Tigerqn,

    Which promises Stalin made in Yalta but did not keep?

    Chapters II & VII

    Leave a comment:


  • Egorka
    replied
    Originally posted by tigersqn View Post
    Stalin also made many promises at Yalta that he failed to live up to.
    Those promises obviously didn't fit into his plans but the Manchurian Campaign just as obviously DID fit into his plans.
    Tigerqn,

    Which promises Stalin made in Yalta but did not keep?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X