(english / srpskohrvatski / italiano) Il revisionismo storico atlantista sulla II Guerra Mondiale
1) Lest we forget? Western amnesia about Soviet role in WWII victory has some disturbing aspects… (by J. Laughland, 7 Aug, 2019) 2) Povodom Dana D: Tito na proslavi proboja u Normandiji (Društvo „Josip Broz Tito“ Split, 5. 6. 2019.) 3) 75° anniversario dello sbarco in Normandia: ristabilire la verità! (Parti Révolutionnaire Communistes) More links / altri link: D-DAY E LO SPETTRO DEL FRONTE ORIENTALE (RM Anish, Internationalist 360°, 8 giugno 2019) http://aurorasito.altervista.org/?p=7411 ORIG.: D-DAY AND THE SPECTER OF THE EASTERN FRONT (June 08, 2019 by Anish R M) https://peoplesdispatch.org/2019/06/08/d-day-and-the-specter-of-the-eastern-front/ D-DAY… PIÙ SCENEGGIATA CHE DECISIVO NELLA SECONDA GUERRA MONDIALE (di Finian Cunningham, SCF 6 giugno 2019) http://aurorasito.altervista.org/?p=7362 ORIG: D-DAY… MORE DRAMA THAN DECISIVE IN WORLD WAR II VICTORY (by Finian Cunningham, June 6, 2019) https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/06/06/d-day-more-drama-than-decisive-in-world-war-ii-victory/ 75° DELLA VITTORIA SUL NAZISMO: LA STORIA RUBATA (di Fabrizio Poggi, 4 Giugno 2019) http://contropiano.org/news/internazionale-news/2019/06/04/75-della-vittoria-sul-nazismo-la-storia-rubata-0116089 oppure http://www.cnj.it/home/it/informazione/jugoinfo/9160-9054-75-della-vittoria-sul-nazismo-la-storia-rubat-a.html LA GERMANIA FU SCONFITTA SUL FRONTE ORIENTALE, NON IN NORMANDIA (di Eric Margolis, 9.6.2018) http://aurorasito.altervista.org/?p=7479 ORIG.: GERMANY WAS DEFEATED ON THE EASTERN FRONT, NOT NORMANDY (by Eric Margolis, June 9, 2018) https://ericmargolis.com/2019/06/germany-was-defeated-on-the-eastern-front-not-normandy-originally-published-june-9-2018/ ANNIE LACROX-RIZ SULLA UNIONE EUROPEA E IL D-DAY (JUGOINFO, 7.6.2014) 1) Jaces-Marie Bourget: MEDIOKRITETI KAO OSNIVAČI EVROPSKE UNIJE 2) Annie Lacroix-Riz: LO SBARCO DEL 6 GIUGNO 1944 DAL MITO ODIERNO ALLA REALTÀ STORICA http://www.cnj.it/home/it/informazione/jugoinfo/7962-8000-annie-lacrox-riz-sulla-unione-europea-e-il-d-day.html FLASHBACK 2009: BARACK OBAMA REJECTS NORMANDY TRIP TO AVOID OFFENDING GERMANY (By Toby Harnden, 3 Apr 2009) Barack Obama, concerned about offending Britain and Germany, rebuffed strenuous attempts by President Nicolas Sarkozy of France to persuade the new American president to make a trip to Normandy this week... http://www.telegrap h.co.uk/news/ worldnews/ northamerica/ usa/barackobama/ 5096803/Barack- Obama-rejects- Normandy- trip-to-avoid- offending- Germany.html === 1 === https://www.rt.com/op-ed/465991-ww2-europe-soviet-liberation-nazi/ Lest we forget? Western amnesia about Soviet role in WWII victory has some disturbing aspects… by John Laughland, 7 Aug, 2019 In the autumn of 1944, 75 years ago, the Red Army reached the borders of the German Reich; cities such as Minsk, Vilnius, and Brest having been liberated in July as Soviet forces swept West. Today, the Russian Federation celebrates these victories with the same emotion and pride as Western allies celebrate the Normandy landings and the subsequent battle for France, which occurred at the same time. Yet, certain EU countries, notably the Baltic states, have called <https://bnn-news.com/baltic-states-protest-against-moscow-s-plans-to-celebrate-baltics-%20liberation-with-fireworks-202883> these Russian celebrations “a provocation.” They even summoned Russian ambassadors in protest, saying the Red Army had not brought liberation but instead just another occupation. Their attitude is in stark contrast to that of successive German governments whose most senior representatives have been happy to be associated with the Allies’ celebrations for years, even though their country was not only occupied after 1945 but also divided into two mutually-hostile states. The sour attitude of the Balts is part of a much bigger problem, namely a self-congratulatory Western amnesia about the role of the Soviet Union in WWII. It is safe to say that the German-Russian war of 1941-1945 was by far the bloodiest conflict in human history; and moreover that the fighting in the East dwarfed anything that happened in the West. Hitler’s occupation of Western Europe was nothing but a prelude to his real goal, the subjection of Eastern Europe and parts of the Soviet Union to German domination in pursuit of the Nazi project of establishing “living space” (Lebensraum) for ethnic Germans there. Yet, the decisive role of the USSR in defeating Nazi Germany has been eradicated from the collective memory of the West – President Putin was not even invited to this year’s Normandy celebrations – and instead the war is remembered only as a victory for liberal democracies against two equally evil totalitarianisms. This amnesia is not reciprocated on the Russian side. Although the Soviet military effort and, above all, the terrible suffering inflicted on the civilian population (more than 26 million Soviet citizens died in the war, in contrast to about 400,000 each in Britain and America) is overlooked in the West, Russians today cherish fondly the memory of the East-West alliance that brought Germany to her knees. They recall, including in ceremonies and celebrations, the fraternal meeting between the US and Soviet troops on the Elbe on April 25, 1945. In their public statements they say that the war was won thanks only to a common effort, and that one side on its own could not have prevailed against Hitler. This is about as obvious a statement of geopolitical fact as it is possible to imagine. Alas, Western minds, polluted by their obsession that they embody universal values which must necessarily win because they are on the right side of history, forget it. There is a further aspect of Western amnesia which is disturbing. The Nazi obsession with eradicating the Jews, which was put into operation by the bullet as soon as Poland was invaded, and thus long before the notorious gas chambers were constructed, was only a part – even if it is the most shocking part – of a larger plan of racial extermination which included Slavs. In June 1942, a senior German academic and specialist in agriculture sent Himmler a project for the settlement of Germans in the Eastern territories which foresaw the elimination by deportation, starvation or murder of tens of millions of Slavs – Poles, Ukrainians, Belarussian, and so on. This “Generalplan Ost” is largely forgotten about today because we remember instead the industrial murder of Jews. But that horror should not be allowed to obscure other horrors, especially since the persecution of Slavs was at the forefront of everyone’s mind when the plans were first laid to prosecute the Nazi leadership after the war but before the Holocaust was properly understood. In his report <https://www.roberthjackson.org/nuremberg-event/the-report-to-the-president/> to President Truman dated 6 June 1945, Robert Jackson, the former Attorney General who was to become the chief prosecutor at Nuremberg, cited the persecution of Poles and other Slav peoples in the occupied parts of Eastern Europe, but said not a word about Jews. However, “amnesia” is not an adequate explanation for the official position of the Baltic states on the events of 1940-1945. “Dishonesty” or “distortion” would be more accurate to describe those countries’ claim that they were “occupied” by the Soviet Union in 1940, and then again after 1945. This theory of occupation is used to claim the historical continuity of the Baltic states after 1991 with the inter-war independent Baltic states but it is untrue. Those states were not occupied by the USSR but instead annexed by it and fully integrated into the Soviet state. This is a totally different regime from occupation because it meant that the Balts became Soviet citizens with the same rights – and the same suffering – as Russians and all the other nationalities of the Soviet state. The Baltic theory of “occupation” also conveniently overlooks the fact that Latvia and Estonia, who today denounce the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of non-aggression between Germany and the Soviet Union, signed on 23 August 1939, as a moral outrage, themselves signed non-aggression pacts with Hitler in June 1939. (Those treaties <https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/LON/Volume%20198/v198.pdf> can be consulted here, pages 49 and 105.) Moreover, they did so not only to protect themselves but also out of ideological affinity with Nazism; Latvia and Estonia had become dictatorships in the mid-1930s: the president of Latvia, Karlis Ulmanis, was greeted with Nazi salutes <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C4%81rlis_Ulmanis#/media/File:Karlis_Ulmanis_1934.jpg>when he seized power and banned all political parties in 1934. This inconvenient fact did not stop Latvia seeking out Ulmanis’ great-nephew Guntis to become president after the collapse of the USSR, in a show of historical continuity with the pre-war state and in order to maintain the fiction of occupation. So much for the pretence that the Baltic states were democratic before 1940. The Balts today pretend that the period of “occupation” was one of ethnic domination by Russians over ethnic Balts but this is also nonsense. Russians might as well claim that they were subject to Georgian dictatorship under Stalin. The fact is that the Soviet system was brutal for all Soviet citizens and that more Russians suffered under it than other nationalities. The Soviet elite believed that its system was the best in the world and it introduced the same regime all over the territory of the USSR without national discrimination. It is precisely this issue which radically distinguishes Soviet Communism from Nazism, and therefore makes it absurd to treat the two regimes as if they were equal. The Russians have every right to recall their finest hour with pride, just as the British do. The sorry history of the Cold War lay in the future in 1944; it did not break out properly until 1948 and who knows how the USSR itself might have evolved if, as Stalin proposed, a central European buffer zone of neutral states including a non-aligned Germany had been accepted in the West? The Balts played a big role in the Soviet state after 1945, as they had done in early Bolshevism, and they should not be allowed to airbrush their own national responsibilities out of the picture any more than anyone else. John Laughland, who has a doctorate in philosophy from the University of Oxford and who has taught at universities in Paris and Rome, is a historian and specialist in international affairs. === 2 === http://www.srp.hr/povodom-dana-d-tito-na-proslavi-proboja-u-normandiji/ POVODOM DANA D: TITO NA PROSLAVI PROBOJA U NORMANDIJI Povodom 75. godišnjice otvaranja zapadnog fronta od strane saveznika u II. svjetskom ratu 6 lipnja 1944., kada je pokrenuta jedna od najvećih pomorskih invazija u kojoj je sudjelovalo gotovo 150 hiljada vojnika, službenog naziva Operacija Neptun kao dio šire operacije Overlord, popularno nazvana Dan D ili invazija saveznika na Normandiju, prilika je da se svjetska javnost i ove godine podsjeti na ovu značajnu bitku kao prekretnicu u konačnom slamanju fašističkih Sila osovine, Trećeg Reicha i njegovih saveznika, među koje nažalost spada i kvislinška tzv. NDH, nasuprot većeg dijela naroda u Hrvatskoj i bivšoj Jugoslaviji koji je stao uz Tita i partizane. Toga dana izjave su dali Glavni komandant savezničkih snaga Dwight D. Eisenhower koji je poručio svojim vojnicima „oči svijeta uperene su u vas… nade i molitve svih ljudi koji vole slobodu marširaju danas s vama… nećemo prihvatiti ništa drugo nego potpunu pobjedu“, kao i američki predsjednik Franklin Delano Roosevelt koji na radiju poručuje „da se oni ne bore za osvajanje već za oslobođenje“, dok je u Donjem domu britanskog Parlamenta premijer Winston Churchill održao govor opisujući Normandijsku operaciju „najkompliciranijom i najtežom koja se ikada odigrala“. Ova bitka, koja predstavlja početak kraja fašističke dominacije, uz ključni doprinos sovjetske Crvene armije na drugoj strani, imala je odlučujući značaj na daljnji tok rata u većem dijelu Evrope, ali ne i direktno na razvoj vojne situacije na jugoslavenskom ratištu na kojem je upravo tada propala operacija Desanta na Drvar protiv Tita i Vrhovnog štaba NOVJ, uz jačanje jugoslavenske partizanske armije koja na svom području vezuje znatne okupatorske snage. Dugo odgađana akcija zapadnih saveznika imala je dva strateška cilja: aktivnije izmoriti sovjetsku armiju kasnijim uključivanjem u ratni sukob te preduhitriti veliku ofanzivu Crvene armije pod nazivom „Bagration“ i njen utjecaj na oslobođene teritorije. Zato i nije iznenađenje da se godišnjica Normandijske invazije od strane zapadnih zemalja svečano obilježava, a što često američki predsjednici koriste kao pozornicu za jedan od svojih najvažnijih govora. Nažalost, antifašizam, antifašistička borba, partizani i napose Tito, kao pobjednički vojskovođa na južnoslavenskim prostorima, te godišnjice mnogih bitaka, ljudi i događaja iz tog vremena, vlasti u današnjoj Hrvatskoj naveliko ignoriraju – bilo da se radi o domaćim ili pak svjetskim događajima. Tako je domaći uznapredovali povijesni revizionizam uklonio sva obilježja koja su podsjećala na pobjedničke partizane, kulturocidno uklanjajući gotovo svu spomeničku baštinu, imena ulica i trgova, škola i ustanova po značajnim događajima iz razdoblja NOB-a. Još je svježa odluka predsjednice da iz svog ureda ukloni bistu Josipa Broza Tita kao i sramna odluka Gradskog vijeća Zagreba – Grada heroja, koji je uklonio ime Trga maršala Tita i mnogi drugi. Za razliku od toga, i bez obzira na skandalozne događaje u njegovoj rodnoj zemlji, Tito je u svijetu još uvijek simbol uspješnog antifašističkog vojskovođe, čovjek mira i suradnje među narodima. Tako je na proslavi obilježavanja 70. godišnjice proboja fronta u Normandiji 4. lipnja 2014. našem Maršalu ukazana iznimna počast, poštovanje i zahvala, gdje se Tito sa svojim velikim pano-portretom našao između glavnih vojskovođa Antifašističke koalicije: Charlesa de Gaullea, Winstona Churchilla i drugih. Split, 5. 6. 2019. Društvo „Josip Broz Tito“ Split === 3 === https://www.resistenze.org/sito/te/cu/st/custjf10-021648.htm www.resistenze.org <http://www.resistenze.org/> - cultura e memoria resistenti - storia - 10-06-19 - n. 715 75° anniversario dello sbarco in Normandia: ristabilire la verità! Parti Révolutionnaire Communistes | sitecommunistes.org <https://www.sitecommunistes.org/index.php/france/politique/515-75e-anniversaire-du-debarquement-en-normandie-retablir-la-verite> Traduzione per Resistenze.org <http://www.resistenze.org/> a cura del Centro di Cultura e Documentazione Popolare 09/06/2019 Le commemorazioni sono sempre oggetto di una intensa attività nella lotta delle idee. Così per il 75° anniversario dello sbarco di truppe alleate, principalmente americane e britanniche in Normandia. Tutto è orientato ad accreditare l'idea che la liberazione della Francia sia stata opera esclusiva delle truppe provenienti dagli Stati Uniti. La presenza del presidente americano Trump e il mancato invito della Russia rafforzano questa affermazione. Una breve rassegna dei fatti mostra che questa tesi è una menzogna che mira a negare il ruolo decisivo svolto nella sconfitta del nazismo dall'Unione Sovietica e dalla resistenza nazionale e soprattutto comunista. Questa guerra fu una guerra imperialista legata ai violenti scontri al suo interno per il dominio dell'Europa e dell'Asia, mirava soprattutto all'Unione Sovietica con l'obiettivo di distruggere il primo stato socialista. Le manovre anglo-francesi prebelliche, confermate dal libro di Ivan Maysky Qui aidait Hitler, mostrano la volontà di questi due paesi di lasciare le mani libere alla Germania nazista all'Est e dell'intesa con Hitler sulla spogliazione dell'URSS. Sebbene queste manovre abbiano firmato la condanna a morte di Polonia e Cecoslovacchia, non hanno impedito i primi colpi contro Francia e Inghilterra e lasciato l'URSS da sola contro la Germania. Con le mani libere in Occidente dopo la sconfitta della Francia voluta dalla sua grande borghesia, la Germania nazista attaccò l'Unione Sovietica con l'obiettivo di trasformarla in un'area di espansione riducendo la sua popolazione in schiavitù. Fu una lotta all'ultimo sangue. Senza la determinazione dei popoli dell'URSS e della leadership politica comunista, il nazismo non sarebbe mai stato sconfitto. I sacrifici furono pesantissimi. 25 milioni di morti civili e militari ed un paese devastato e dissanguato è emerso vittorioso da questa guerra di aggressione e ha liberato gran parte dell'Europa. Nonostante le richieste pressanti dei leader sovietici per l'apertura di un secondo fronte in Occidente, gli Stati Uniti e l'Inghilterra si sono attardati preferendo approfittare dell'indebolimento dell'URSS e solo quando l'URSS ha preso ad avanzare a tappe forzate su Berlino, gli anglo-americani hanno ritenuto di ricomparire sul fronte occidentale. Riconosciamolo, ma con moderazione! Se 26 divisioni dell'esercito tedesco erano mobilitate sul fronte occidentale al momento dello sbarco in Normandia, 170 combattevano le forze sovietiche sul fronte orientale! Non neghiamo il ruolo svolto dallo sbarco in Normandia, ma non dimentichiamo che senza il posto occupato dalla resistenza nella lotta contro il nazismo e senza il ruolo decisivo dell'URSS, la Francia sarebbe stata considerata dagli americani come territorio occupato e non come nazione sovrana. Questo è ciò che vogliono nascondere soprattutto alle giovani generazioni con una storia occulta e distorta. Oggi, quindi, la commemorazione dell'anniversario tenta di farci bere il carattere unilaterale dell'azione degli Stati Uniti, per giustificare meglio il nostro arruolamento nella cosiddetta "guerra fredda", una guerra in realtà molto calda contro i paesi socialisti e specialmente contro l'Unione Sovietica, perché eravamo, come la maggior parte dei paesi europei, membri dell'alleanza imperialista della NATO. Trump è venuto per ricordare tutto questo e significa che gli Stati Uniti sono i capi di questa alleanza militare. È venuto a ribadire che la strategia della forza nelle relazioni internazionali tra le potenze imperialiste per garantire la supremazia non può essere messa in discussione. A Londra, è venuto per difendere la Brexit e sostenere B. Johnson, che rappresenta la frazione filoamericana del grande capitale e che vuole sbarazzarsi degli ormeggi dell'imperialismo europeo per approdare in seno agli Stati Uniti.
