Churchill assigned the stigma of the heirs of the Third Reich to the Anglo-Saxons


March 5 of this year can be considered the anniversary of the event, which in the official historiography of both Russia and the West is considered to be the starting point of the Cold War, which lasted until the fall of the Soviet Union - a speech at Westminster College by the American Fulton Winston Churchill, at that time already a former prime minister Minister of Great Britain.


In fact, everything, of course, is much more complicated - and the confrontation between our country and the Anglo-Saxon world began far from 1946, and even the alliance with the USSR, forcedly created by the West during the Second World War, “cracked” not then. The Fulton Speech, included in the textbooks, became not the source, but rather only the start of the next stage of global geopolitical processes that lasted for centuries and continues to this day. That is why we should refresh our memory today.

Anglo-Saxons - heirs of the Third Reich


Like any event of truly world-historical significance, the Fulton Speech received various interpretations, sometimes “diverging” to full polarity. There are a lot of outright speculations about it, as well as simply erroneous opinions. Let's try to at least briefly understand all this diversity. In the USSR, Sir Winston's speech immediately received an extremely negative assessment. Moreover, it should be noted that, unlike in later times, Soviet ideologues did not at all try to "silence" their own opponents, but entered into open polemics with them. It took place both on the pages of the country's leading publications, Pravda and Izvestia, and on radio broadcasts. At the same time, if not the entire speech, then very extensive quotations from it, were published and voiced. Churchill was opposed not only by leading Soviet journalists, but also, for example, by the luminary of Russian historical science, Academician Yevgeny Tarle.

A week later, Comrade Stalin personally joined the discussion: Pravda published a very extensive interview with him dedicated to the Fulton speech, which alone more than eloquently testifies to how seriously and painfully this demarche was taken by the USSR leadership. We must pay tribute to Joseph Vissarionovich - he did not stand a pause of seven days in vain. The characterization given to them of the performance of the former "ally" is so accurate and comprehensive that at least put it in a frame and hang it on the wall. In his interview, Stalin, in fact, puts an absolute sign of equality between Hitler's Nazism and Churchill's theory of the "superiority" of the Anglo-Saxon race, which, according to the Briton, has a certain "sacred right" to dominate the world.

No wonder that in many cartoons that appeared in various Soviet publications, the former British prime minister was portrayed as a figure casting shadows in the form of Hitler and Goebbels. And here we must pay tribute to our artists - they not only embodied Stalin's words in the graphics in this way, but also made a reference to one of the main aphorisms "presented" to the world precisely by the "Fulton speech". We are talking, of course, about the "Iron Curtain", which became a frequently used idiom only "with the light hand" of Churchill. However, this phrase was not invented and used for the first time by him. He was very fond of the doctor of propaganda Joseph Goebbels - it is reliably known that in his printed "creations" he used this term more than once. Did Joseph Vissarionovich allow exaggeration when he said that Churchill and his associates are carriers of the "English racial theory", the essence and meaning of which is the thesis of the world domination of the Anglo-Saxon race? Not at all.

Let's start with the fact that the "scientific basis" for the future monstrous crimes of the possessed Fuhrer and his followers was just the Anglo-Saxons who gave birth to the very concept of "higher" and "lower" races, as well as developed the doctrine of the "superiority of the Nordic peoples." Thomas Carlyle, Houston Chamberlain, James Hunt, Francis Galton (Charles Darwin's cousin, by the way), Carl Pearson are all British gentlemen, pundits. The last of them, by the way, openly defended the idea of ​​"the need for white people to seize territories for their own residence" and similar theses, which led the NSDAP members into complete delight. "I admire the people of England who have done unheard-of colonization!" - this is not one of the members of the English royal house or parliament. This is Adolf Hitler ... And, by the way, the idea of ​​concentration camps the "supermen" of Germany also got from the sirs. The British were the first to create them in the world.

Wolves in sheep's clothing


As a matter of fact, the Third Reich itself was, again, a project of the Anglo-Saxon world, created in order to destroy the Soviet Union by the hands of the German Nazis. Yes, in the end, everything got out of control and the enraged "laboratory animal", painfully bitten by those who thought they were its masters, had to be shot. True, at the same time, again, basically, by someone else's hands and someone else's victims. However, in this case, the USSR not only did not die, but significantly strengthened its position and expanded its sphere of influence in the world. The fact that they would have to bring the matter to the end with their own hands was realized in Britain and the United States already in 1944-1945. That is why they climbed into the war in Europe, which was practically won not by them.

It is naive to consider the "Fulton Speech" the beginning of the Cold War and the "point of no return" in relations between the West and the Soviet Union. Operation Unthinkable was planned by the British military in 1945, when Winston Churchill was still head of the local government. He gave the command to develop a plan, according to which on July 1, 1945, its "allies" were to fall on the Red Army in the company of the Nazis who had not been killed. The whole "mass" was spoiled by the Americans, who categorically refused to participate in this adventure. For reasons of military honor, allied duty and philanthropy? Nothing of the kind, of course. They just needed the Red Army to the point of crushing Japan - they themselves would not have managed in ten years ... But they began to develop their own plans for an attack on the USSR in Washington not even from the moment of the first successful test of nuclear weapons, but from 1944, when the Committee of the Chiefs of Staff of the US Army sent a secret report to the White House on the inevitability of a military clash with our country. And then it started: "Trojan", "Dropshot" and so on. By the way, about the atomic bomb ... Sir Winston paid great attention to it in his speech.

His passages on this subject are quoted and mentioned much less often than the common quote about the "Iron Curtain", but in vain. A lot of interesting things! Churchill crucifies that possession of "classified information and technology"Necessary for the creation of atomic weapons by anyone in the world except the United States, Britain and Canada, would be not just" imprudent and wrong ", but downright" criminal insanity. " It spreads like a nightingale, claiming that because the monopoly on nuclear weapons belongs to the Americans and their allies "not a single person in any country in the world has begun to sleep worse." Well, of course, millions of Soviet people, who in 1946 were going to be wiped off the face of the earth with these same bombs, do not count for Sir Winston ... Churchill argued that "the falling of nuclear secrets into the hands of communist or neo-fascist regimes" on this issue, the Anglo-Saxons tried to pose even then!), will lead to "horrific consequences that cannot be imagined." This "peacemaker", in his words, striving only to "save the world from war and tyranny," foaming at the mouth, defended the Anglo-Saxon monopoly on nuclear superweapons. He spoke bluntly about the need to "put things in order" in the "world house" before this monopoly can be broken. "Restoring order" was planned by destroying the Soviet Union with an atomic bomb - and nothing else.

These intentions were thwarted only by the unprecedented feat of Soviet intelligence officers and scientists, the fantastic nuclear breakthrough unimaginable by the West, carried out under the leadership of Lavrenty Beria. Speaking about the prospects for the development of the United Nations, the British ex-prime minister had in mind something quite different from what might seem at first glance. Interpreting it as a global structure that "is designed to prevent a new war", he saw before him an all-planetary police officer for the "brave new world" ruled by the Anglo-Saxons and living by their laws.

We feel the consequences 75 years later


It is clear that historians of the liberal persuasion often try to present the matter in such a way that "Churchill was misunderstood in the USSR." They say that he did not mean any confrontation at all, and did not start the "Cold War", but strove only for universal peace and prosperity. After all, it was not for nothing that in the "Fulton speech" he expressed "respect for the valiant Russian people", and called Stalin his "military comrade"! He didn't want anything bad ... Aha! No matter how it is - Sir Winston Churchill was not only a wonderful orator and a great politician. He also had a third quality that conditioned the first two - he was a great liar. At the same time, it should be noted that in this case he does not seem at all to be some kind of insidious geek among the British sirs. Quite the opposite - Churchill was, as they wrote in Soviet textbooks on literature, a "typical representative" of the establishment of a country for which there never existed and does not exist permanent allies or friends, but only one permanent interests. What he really saw the role of the UN is perfectly illustrated by his rants about the fact that this structure desperately needs its own armed forces. Churchill did not see them in the form of modern "blue helmets" - he considered it necessary to create "air squadrons", which, under the auspices of the UN, would "bring democracy to the world" in their bomb bays.

Note that such "peacekeeping forces" are not needed in any way to enlighten some indigenous tribe Ili-or, who have thought to arrange genocide against a neighboring tribe Barely. According to Churchill's idea, the "World Air Force" was to be used for a completely different purpose. Fortunately, his cannibalistic ideas were destined to receive a long reprieve. The American "peacekeepers" who had thrust themselves into Korea with the blessing of the UN on their "flying fortresses" from Stalin's falcons were so good that they sat relatively quietly until the collapse of the USSR.

However, immediately after it, Churchill's plans for UN-sanctioned bombing "in the name of peace" were immediately implemented! Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq ... All this is a concrete and real application of his ideas in practice. In Churchill's speech, which is perhaps the standard of the deceitful and cynical policy The West, its double standards, everything is not what it seems. He is talking about some kind of "ideals": security and well-being, progress and freedom. But it immediately stipulates that only those rights and freedoms enjoyed by the citizens of the British Empire are "true" and standard. Well, and the United States, of course ... This is where the new division of the world into "clean" and unclean, "sinful" and righteous "begins." Yes, Churchill does not call directly for a war against the USSR and its destruction. However, he clearly and unambiguously makes it clear: there is a "free world" and there are "tyrannies" with which this world will have to fight for life and death, and, of course, exclusively "in the name of higher ideals" and "for the sake of its own security ". Tellingly, the words of Sir Winston about the "iron curtain that fell on Europe" and about the "shadow falling on the whole world" because of the "dangerous challenge that the communist parties and their fifth columns throw down to Christian civilization" appeared at the time of their pronouncement the most perfect, absolute lie. Just after the end of the Great Patriotic War, Stalin behaved very honestly with the Western "allies" - our troops left not only Denmark and Norway, but also Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia. Indeed, the most powerful communist movements in France, Italy, Greece did not receive the support under which they could easily take power in their countries. Stalin faithfully adhered to the agreements reached (including with Churchill's participation) in Tehran and Yalta, but Sir Winston in Fulton already openly said that “the Yalta agreements were signed when everyone thought that the war with Japan would continue for another 18 months, and will not end the same summer. " Therefore, it is not necessary to carry them out. Truly British "logic" and "honesty"!

We all know what events became a logical continuation of the speech in Fulton: the Bretton Woods Conference in 1947, which consolidated the global financial dominance of the dollar and the US Federal Reserve, the creation in 1949 of NATO, whose sole purpose was to destroy the USSR ... Stalin perfectly understood the essence of the vile intentions of the Anglo-Saxons already in 1946; he began real preparations for a new military clash with the West only at the beginning of 1950, when it became finally and irrevocably clear: the former "allies" would not leave us alone.

The confrontation, originating from all the events mentioned above, continues to this day. Since 2014, it has flared up with renewed vigor and is now flaring up even hotter. It is not for nothing that Vladimir Putin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov, on the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the Fulton speech, said that “much in the West's worldview” regarding our country, formed in it, remained unchanged. Much?! Yes, perhaps that's all. Three quarters of a century that have passed since then, alas, did not rid the Anglo-Saxon masters of the illusion of their own exclusiveness and superiority. Perhaps the mission of their enlightenment is to be fulfilled by the present generations?
75 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker 6 March 2021 10: 57
    +1
    is the mission to enlighten them to be fulfilled by the present generations?

    What kind of enlightenment can we talk about when the followers of EBN are in power? Watch Yeltsin's speech to the US Congress.



    Yesterday I read the news. We have already conducted a survey. It turns out that 47% approve of the three-day voting in the elections! And the State Duma is going to consider the wishes of citizens. Promptly true? Unfortunately, the current government is ready to destroy the country, rather than give up power or make some changes.
    1. 123 Offline 123
      123 (123) 6 March 2021 15: 54
      0
      What kind of enlightenment can we talk about when the followers of EBN are in power?

      Were Stalin's Followers Better?



      Putin is as similar to Yeltsin as Stalin to Gorbachev.

      Yesterday I read the news. We have already conducted a survey. It turns out that 47% approve of the three-day voting in the elections! And the State Duma is going to consider the wishes of citizens.

      Didn't go into details, what is the essence and why are you categorically against? What's so terrible about that?

      Unfortunately, the current government is ready to destroy the country, rather than give up power or make some changes.

      Was it different before? Power was given joyfully and with songs? Changes? Yes, please, what your heart desires .. Was that how it was? Can you give an example?
  2. Dmitry S. Offline Dmitry S.
    Dmitry S. (Dmitry Sanin) 6 March 2021 11: 45
    +2
    Perhaps the mission of their enlightenment is to be fulfilled by the present generations?

    Not. None of them will admonish them for a simple reason: it is impossible to win by accepting the game by their rules. Humanism and tolerance will kill this world, due to the contradiction with the laws of nature.
    By the way, any island civilization is doomed to degeneration without expansion.
  3. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
    Alexzn (Alexander) 6 March 2021 13: 07
    0
    As an agitprop, the article makes sense. From the point of view of historical analysis - stupidity on stupidity. So after all - Necropy.
    1. George W. Bush - medium (George Bush - average) 6 March 2021 13: 45
      -1
      For that you are defined as Dill. Very dill.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 6 March 2021 14: 51
      0
      Alexzn, but from the point of view of mathematical analysis, how do you like the article?

      In the broadest sense, historical analysis in journalism is understood as the knowledge of historical phenomena. It is clear that a journalist is not a scientist-historian, but he can also study historically significant events (of course, within the limits of journalistic capabilities and tasks).

      The article is interesting. Thanks to the author!
  4. trampoline instructor (Bazil Bazil) 6 March 2021 13: 49
    -2
    Perhaps the mission of their enlightenment is to be fulfilled by the present generations?

    Proceeding from the fact that in all three comments the last phrase of the opus is discussed, then according to the theory of probability, except for it, no one reads the opus himself. And it is right.

    LONDONGRAD
    From Russia with cash
    Author: Hollingsworth M., Lansley S.
    Translator: Mizinina Irina Nikolaevna
    Publisher: AST, 2010

    It is said that about 500 Russians are now permanently residing in Britain. Of these, several hundred people are classified by the authors of the book as super-rich oligarchs. And the main characters of the book are billionaires Abramovich, Berezovsky, Deripaska and Khodorkovsky, of whom the latter spent a lot of time in Great Britain before his imprisonment. The Russian wealthy have a great influence on the London real estate market.
    Back in 2006, they bought 240 houses in the British capital, each worth more than a million pounds. That is, London has confidently become the favorite foreign city of the Russian rich. This massive Russian influx was initiated by Roman Abramovich. He said in 2003: "I will buy a house for 28 million pounds, a penthouse for 36 million and a country residence for 23 million."
    Mark Gollingsworth says: “I think it helps a share of our economy thrive: agency labor, luxury goods markets, luxury cars and yachts, private jets, jewelry, art. Of course, this is only a small part of the economy, but also a positive factor. It is another matter that the style in which Russian oligarchs conduct their affairs is alarming: it is often very opaque, causing legal claims, problems, conflicts, and lawsuits. Often Russian politics interferes in everything, for example, as was the case with the murder of Alexander Litvinenko in London. "
    The lifestyle of Russian oligarchs is often surprising and even disgusting in Britain. Against the backdrop of the traditionally humble behavior of British millionaires, who are often impossible to distinguish from ordinary people, Russians do their best to show how rich they are. The book "Londongrad" describes how Abramovich in Baku wanted to eat sushi, which was not there. He ordered to buy them in London in an expensive restaurant and deliver them by limousine to the airfield, and from there to Baku by his private plane. It all cost more than $ 60. The book's authors say it may have been the most expensive takeout purchase in history.

    Nda, sir, and the "non-fouls" can only lick their lips, envy and write various libels; today's generations are already busy with very different things.
  5. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  6. Dmitry S. Offline Dmitry S.
    Dmitry S. (Dmitry Sanin) 6 March 2021 15: 36
    +2
    Quote: AlexZN
    As an agitprop, the article makes sense. From the point of view of historical analysis - stupidity on stupidity. So after all - Necropy.

    This is not a vyunoshi, but a mature husband.
  7. Dmitry S. Offline Dmitry S.
    Dmitry S. (Dmitry Sanin) 6 March 2021 15: 38
    0
    Quote: trampoline instructor
    Come on, take it! Fas! Fas!
    Nonsense that you don’t know how to write, but ideological and morally persistent. Malades!

    Your saliva seems out of place here. A normal article with good historical motivation.
    1. trampoline instructor (Bazil Bazil) 6 March 2021 19: 38
      0
      For that you are defined as Dill. Very dill.

      My comment does not refer to the opus, but to the above comment.
  8. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
    Alexzn (Alexander) 6 March 2021 16: 59
    0
    He gave the command to develop a plan, according to which on July 1, 1945, its "allies" were to fall on the Red Army in the company of the Nazis who had not been killed. The whole "mass" was spoiled by the Americans, who categorically refused to participate in this adventure. For reasons of military honor, allied duty and philanthropy? Nothing of the kind, of course. They just needed the Red Army to the point of defeating Japan - they themselves would not have managed in ten years ...

    Does it make sense in terms of mathematical analysis? First, jerking (they should have attacked), and then outright stupidity (and at 10 years old they would not have managed).
    And this approach is applied throughout the article.
    1. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 6 March 2021 17: 33
      0
      Alexzn... This is to get you interested in reading other sources on the subject.


      You troll the author of the article, this is my conclusion.
      1. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
        Alexzn (Alexander) 6 March 2021 18: 06
        -1
        No, not a troll. The plans for Operation Unthinkable are common knowledge, but these plans do not speak as - On July 1, 1945, its "allies" were to attack the Red Army in the company of the Nazis who were not killed. , this is an operational plan in case the Soviet troops do not stop after the capture of Berlin at the lines agreed in Yalta. Disarmed combat-ready units were stationed in several areas (mainly in the Black Forest) in the immediate vicinity of the trophy weapon depots, taking into account the logistics of their possible arming as soon as possible. But it was precisely about the case of the continuation of the offensive to the west. In addition, these camps were deliberately not camouflaged in order to indicate to Stalin the potential for using German resources.
        1. isofat Offline isofat
          isofat (isofat) 6 March 2021 19: 32
          -1
          Alexzn... Troll!

          Quote: AlexZN
          The plans for Operation Unthinkable are well known, but these plans do not talk about how - on July 1, 1945, its "allies" were to fall on the Red Army in the company of the Nazis who were not killed.

          The language in which the plans are presented and the language in which the journalist deliberately emphasizes one of the points, or more of the plan he describes, quite naturally do not coincide. Everyone can make their own conclusions. We got acquainted with the point of view of a journalist.

          The plan is freely available, it is not difficult to find the Internet resources where it is published.

          PS I agree with many of the author's assessments.
        2. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
          Ulysses (Alexey) 6 March 2021 20: 07
          +1
          But it was precisely about the case of the continuation of the offensive to the west.

          The final plan for Operation Unthinkable has a date of May 22, 1945, when it was already quite clear that no further offensive of the Red Army to the West was observed.

          We read the Report of the Joint Planning Headquarters:

          1. We have analyzed (the possibility of carrying out) Operation Unthinkable. In accordance with the guidelines, the analysis was based on the following premises:
          a) The action receives the full support of public opinion from both the British Empire and the United States, respectively, the morale of the British and American troops remains high.
          b) Great Britain and the United States have full support from the Polish troops and can count on the use of German labor and the remaining German industrial potential.
          c) We cannot rely on any assistance from the armies of other Western powers, although we have bases and equipment at their disposal on their territory, which we may have to resort to.
          d) Russians enter into an alliance with Japan.
          e) The date of the declaration of hostilities is July 1, 1945.

          There is nothing about " in case of a continuation of the advance to the west. " request

          But there is:
          2. The general political goal (of the operation) is to impose the will of the United States and the British Empire on the Russians.

          The rest is lyrics with the aim of turning the arrows on the failed victim of aggression.
          1. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
            Alexzn (Alexander) 6 March 2021 21: 43
            -2
            The points.
            1. This is an OPERATIONAL plan, not a political doctrine or strategic plan.
            2. Someone doubts that the Soviet troops could reach the English Channel, crushing the allies?
            3. With the indisputability of paragraph 2, it is foolish to consider the operational plan, drawn up from fear, as planning real actions ... for July 1, 1945 (... the Russians enter into an alliance with the Japanese)
            4. The operational plan could be used only in the event of aggression from the east, not only for military reasons - the spacecraft was at the peak of its power and on the wave of success. World public opinion is on the side of the USSR. Churchill was a very perspicacious politician and could not naively dream ...
            1. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
              Ulysses (Alexey) 6 March 2021 22: 53
              +2
              The points.

              1.1.
              This is an OPERATIONAL plan,

              The general political goal (of the operation) is to impose the will of the United States and the British Empire on the Russians. in your opinion not a doctrine and not a strategic plan ??
              You shouldn't make yourself an idiot for the sake of Churchill's decay ..
              2.
              Someone doubts that the Soviet troops could reach the English Channel by crushing the allies?

              Tales from the Cold War.
              In 1945, the USSR was exhausted by the war.
              You indirectly confirm only the degree of combat effectiveness of the "allied armies" of the United States, Great Britain and other "frances".

              3.
              With the indisputable point 2, it is foolish to consider an operational plan laid out from fear,

              A good mark to the developers of the plan. lol
              However, there were no alarmists among the developers of the plans; rather, on the contrary.

              4.
              The operational plan could be used only in the event of aggression from the east, not only for military reasons - the spacecraft was at the peak of its power and was also on the wave of success.

              Stupidity, deliberately broadcast since the times of the same "cold war".
              It was fed to the population of Western Europe.
              Why are you dragging her here, can you explain?
              1. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
                Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 09: 17
                -1
                After all (it turns out) you know how to seriously discuss ...
                Again point by point.
                1.
                The general political goal (of the operation) is to impose the will of the United States and the British Empire on the Russians. in your opinion not a doctrine and not a strategic plan ??

                This is nothing more than a tribute to the traditions of that era, especially since it was presented to the Americans. The Soviet plans also contained theses about the victory of communism throughout the world and that the proletarians of all countries ... A beautiful wrapper. And mind you - to impose the will of the Anglo-Saxons, not to crush the USSR, but to impose the will (we are talking about preventing the communists from entering Europe, and not about a full-scale war against the USSR). The name INCIDENTAL itself says a lot.
                2
                Tales from the Cold War.
                In 1945, the USSR was exhausted by the war.
                You indirectly confirm only the degree of combat effectiveness of the "allied armies" of the United States, Great Britain and other "frances".

                You can argue here. Yes, the USSR was exhausted, but the dash to the English Channel was not only possible, but absolutely real. And yes, I directly confirm the degree of combat effectiveness of the allies at that time!
                I saw documents in which the Americans were outraged after visiting one of the camps where the Germans lived in platoon with their officers, did exercises in the morning and conducted political studies. Churchill had to explain himself and make it clear to the Americans that without such combat-ready units, the Russians would crush the allies if something happened. This is not at all a myth of the Cold War, this is the reality of that time. It is good for us to analyze the situation from a distance of 75 years, and Churchill proceeded from a slightly different assessment of reality and it was he who correctly assessed and predicted it. Churchill did everything to prevent Stalin from thinking about moving westward.
                Yes, understanding the degree of depletion of resources, Stalin realized the futility of moving to the west. Do you think Hitler on June 22 did not understand what he got himself into? Leaders choose between “should”, “would like”, “possible”, but often they simply do not have a choice and reality compels them.
                We are not living in an alternate history.
                PS I consider Churchill to be the strongest politician in the West in the 20th century, I estimate it within the framework of the Western coordinate system, where the plan is Unthinkable an example of perspicacity and correct assessment of prospects.
                1. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
                  Ulysses (Alexey) 7 March 2021 14: 03
                  +1
                  After all (it turns out) you know how to seriously discuss ...

                  Sometimes I condescend, but as a rule it is useless to explain common truths to those who have believed.

                  This is nothing more than a tribute to the traditions of that time, especially since it was introduced to the Americans.

                  This is a serious top secret plan, never intended for the general public.
                  A blizzard about "tribute to tradition" can be carried by a person who deliberately does not want to understand the seriousness of such documents.

                  You can argue here. Yes, the USSR was exhausted, but the leap to the English Channel was not only possible, but absolutely real.

                  You are marking time, trying to pull the owl onto the globe for the first time.
                  In 1945, the USSR did not have the material, technical and human resources for the "dash to the English Channel".
                  Stalin really imagined the situation and did not even consider any "jerks".
                  It is not necessary to produce nonsense here.

                  PS The Americans (ordinary people) could be indignant at the orders in the English camps.
                  I have no complaints about ordinary Americans at all. They fought as best they could, they said what they thought ..

                  Churchill, who hated not even the USSR, but Russia as the eternal enemy of Anglo-Saxon aspirations. For me, this is the main thing, and what kind of politician he was can be discussed in the context of his rather vivid biography.

                  And yes, you have your own coordinate systems, we have ours.
                  You can’t argue with that. yes
                  1. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
                    Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 14: 44
                    0
                    PS The Americans (ordinary people) could be indignant at the orders in the English camps.

                    We are talking about an American commission with a three-star general inspecting these camps (the supply was carried out by the Americans). The outrage began with the fact that the Germans retained their insignia and saluted them on the territory of the camp.
                    1. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
                      Ulysses (Alexey) 7 March 2021 15: 04
                      +2
                      We are talking about an American commission with a three-star general inspecting these camps (the supply was carried out by the Americans). The outrage began with the fact that the Germans retained their insignia and saluted them on the territory of the camp.

                      I don't quite understand your surprise.
                      The Yankees were surprised at many things in Europe.
                      For example shoulder straps.
                      The Europeans, in turn, did not quite understand that there is a three-star general.
                      The Americans, according to the recollections of the Europeans, were like uneducated shepherds with weapons who fell into a foreign civilization ..
                      1. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
                        Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 15: 17
                        0
                        I am not surprised, I inform. It's just that not everyone is familiar with such facts. And yes, in general, American soldiers were at the level of Soviet ones from the provinces. However, they were far from intrigue in their primitive vision of the world. Therefore, I will emphasize that the preamble to the operational plan was intended specifically for the Americans, who should have liked the passage about imposing the will of the United States and the British Empire on the Russians.
                      2. isofat Offline isofat
                        isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 15: 31
                        0
                        Quote: AlexZN
                        Therefore, I will emphasize that the preamble to the operational plan was designed specifically for the Americans ...

                        Alexzn, my question for you:

                        The UK government categorically denied the existence of such plans up to 1998 years.

                        What preamble are you talking about for the average American? laughing The document is secret!
                      3. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
                        Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 15: 47
                        -1
                        This is not entirely true. The materials of the plan leaked into the English press in the early 80s (I first met through reprints in a newspaper Abroad), and I read the plan itself in the early 90s.
                        The preamble was not for the ordinary American, but for the generals, who had a vision of the world precisely through the doctrine of exclusivity and domination.
                        If in 2016 Trump proclaims that America is above all and no allusions arise in his head, then in 1945 the American generals had a position on America's political will ...
                      4. isofat Offline isofat
                        isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 15: 57
                        0
                        Quote: AlexZN
                        then in 1945 the American generals had a position on the political will of America ...

                        All the same, the preamble could not be written for the entire generals.
                    2. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
                      Ulysses (Alexey) 7 March 2021 17: 38
                      0
                      What preamble are you talking about for the average American? laughing The document is secret!

                      The man is stubborn and does not understand the normal arguments.
                      Another "cyber warrior" with minimal knowledge.
                  2. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
                    Ulysses (Alexey) 7 March 2021 15: 58
                    +1
                    Therefore, I will emphasize that the preamble to the operational plan was designed specifically for the Americans, which the passage about to impose the will on the Russians

                    Um.
                    Let's move away from our ideological differences and focus on facts.
                    Plan "Unthinkable" classified as "top secret"
                    A maximum of a dozen people know about him.

                    Don't you really understand that this is a top secret document ??
                  3. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
                    Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 17: 24
                    -1
                    I have already shown you that the plan categorically denied by the government partially appeared in the press in the early 80s, in the early 90s I personally read it, despite the fact that it still wore a signature stamp.
                    This whole plan, most likely (I do not presume to assert, but in my opinion) is a method of exerting pressure, a mirage, it seems to exist and it seems to be not, it seems to be top secret and at the same time, the camps in the Black Forest are not hiding from Soviet inspections (to search national criminals). It is really Unthinkable, when you plan something without which it seems as if it is impossible, but if it is not useful, it will not only be a shame, it will undermine trust, not only from the outside, but also in the country.
                    There are a lot of such operational plans in any army, some of them, being secret, were unofficially merged as a way of pressure, designation of position, determination, etc.
                  4. isofat Offline isofat
                    isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 17: 50
                    0
                    Quote: AlexZN
                    There are a lot of such operational plans in any army, some of them, being secret, were unofficially merged as a way of pressure, designation of position, determination, etc.

                    Alexzn, you can be whoever you want. Now you have decided to portray a primitive man. It is your right to tell the readers of the comments your version.

                    I do not believe you, your reasoning is not convincing.

                    Let me remind you of your words:

                    Quote: AlexZN
                    2. Someone doubts that the Soviet troops could reach the English Channel, crushing the allies?

                    I doubt. Since you allow yourself to say that the Soviet troops РјРѕРіР »Ryo, then I, in turn, answer - allies too РјРѕРіР »Ryo and even the plan was bungled, offensive.

                    Some sources suggest that Operation Unthinkable was planned World War III. And what? Could you? They could!
                  5. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
                    Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 18: 42
                    -1
                    So you are initially closer to the tolerances of the author of the note. laughing It's easier for you to believe that the British in 1945 could have planned a world war without the Americans, and Churchill started the Cold War in 46. In my opinion, he best appreciated all the risks of the Second World War and the possibilities of the Third.
                    I was holding a bunch of documents in my hands, which are available to a few and often they go against what is "generally known".
                    We exist in different coordinate systems and our assessments of history are very different.
                  6. isofat Offline isofat
                    isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 19: 10
                    0
                    Quote: AlexZN
                    I was holding a bunch of documents in my hands

                    What are you doing on the site? And, of course, you can't wait to tell us something, in secret! laughing
                  7. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
                    Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 19: 41
                    -1
                    Not at all. This is a thankless job.
                    Come visit, I'll show you a secret.
                  8. isofat Offline isofat
                    isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 19: 47
                    0
                    Alexzn, why look at them? Documents are studied, analyzed ... they work with documents, in one word. By the way, the conclusions may be ambiguous.
          2. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
            Ulysses (Alexey) 7 March 2021 17: 53
            0
            There are a lot of such operational plans in any army, some of them, being secret, were unofficially merged as a way of pressure, designation of position, determination, etc.

            I would have believed you if you presented the USSR's operational plan for the seizure of Europe. repeat

            And so, one fornication for lack of arguments.
          3. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
            Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 18: 10
            -1
            The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and only because it was in 2 copies. This is no longer an operational plan, but a strategic one.
          4. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
            Ulysses (Alexey) 7 March 2021 18: 26
            +1
            The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and only because it was in 2 copies. This is no longer an operational plan, but a strategic one.

            You are trying to evade the essence of the issue.
          5. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
            Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 18: 33
            -2
            If you can provide me with at least one "operational plan" for the extermination of millions of Jews in the death camps ... There are millions of exterminated, but there are no operational plans ...
            But it's strange - there is a plan for the Unthinkable, but there is no third world ...
          6. isofat Offline isofat
            isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 19: 13
            +1
            Alexzn... Friend! There is a plan, even two, but it is not at all operational, that's the point.

            Yemeni children also exist, or rather they are no longer there, by your efforts.
          7. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
            Ulysses (Alexey) 7 March 2021 19: 31
            +2
            If you can provide me with at least one "operational plan" for the extermination of millions of Jews in the death camps ... There are millions of exterminated, but there are no operational plans ...
            But it's strange - there is a plan for the Unthinkable, but there is no third world ...

            What for?
            Pleasure your own wishlist.

            Nothing strange if you don't come up with oblique excuses ..
        3. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
          Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 19: 01
          -1
          Today it is no longer a secret why the demobilization of Soviet servicemen was postponed until the fall of 1945, that the Cambridge Five transmitted information about the plans within the framework of Operation Unthinkable.
          Two sides participated in the confrontation, and depending on the coordinate system, we can assume where is the action and where is the reaction. Both sides distrusted each other. The Americans were less worried about the situation than the British, which is understandable and they were in no hurry to unwind the confrontation, and here Churchill showed himself.
        4. isofat Offline isofat
          isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 19: 58
          0
          Alexzn, it is your army that can be disbanded in one day.

          The war ended in May, demobilization proceeded in stages, and ended in autumn.
    2. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 18: 26
      0
      Quote: AlexZN
      This is no longer an operational plan, but a strategic one.

      Alexzn. You efficiency what received the codename - Operation "The Unthinkable", took from the ceiling and could not prove it. Stop lying and labeling!

      The Hague has already begun to deal with Israeli fanatics. If you killed thousands of children of repatriates, then what did you do with the children of the Arabs?
    3. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
      Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 18: 45
      -1
      If you killed thousands of children of repatriates, then what did you do with the children of the Arabs?

      Well, why post this nonsense?
    4. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 18: 57
      0
      Quote: AlexZN
      Well, why post this nonsense?

      Alexzn... You are talking nonsense, and we have proof, just tell me.

      I spoke about the Yemeni children of your repatriates, for the theft of which the Israeli government pays millions of shekels, the fate of these children is unknown.

      I can prove my delirium, you prove yours. laughing
    5. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
      Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 19: 23
      -2
      You are not in the subject. We are talking about the removal of the children of Yemeni returnees and the transfer to orphanages and Ashkenazi families. Nonsense, I called your statement about the murder of the children of repatriates. This is nonsense.
    6. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 19: 28
      +1


      What happened to the children, Israel still keeps a secret, but since they did not show up ...
    7. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
      Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 19: 58
      -2
      1. And where are the facts of the murder of thousands of children of Yemeni repatriates?
      2. The removal of children from families is a fact and no one argues with him. The deliberate murder of children (thousands ?!) is nonsense.
      3. Yakov Lozovik is a good friend of mine, in fact it was he who hired me 30 years ago.
    8. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 20: 04
      0
      Alexzn... Calm me down so that there will not be even a shadow of doubt, where can I be sure that everything is fine with the children and after that sleep well?

      The screen from Wikipedia makes you picky in this case. And in other sources, the versions are all different. Israel, that trafficked children, why was all this necessary?
    9. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
      Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 20: 55
      -1
      The story is dirty. To understand it, you need to be aware of the Israeli realities in general and the 70-year-old in particular. This is the time when in Israel secular Ashkenazim, socialists, especially Polish ones, were in charge. Yemeni Jews were an illiterate, poor, downtrodden community and very religious. Most of the children suffered from malnutrition, illness, etc. The socialists, as it should be, solely out of humanity (irony) decided that primitive Yemenis would not be able to raise a proud Jew of the future ... Children were removed from families under the pretext of the need for treatment, education and transferred to kibbutzim and separate childless families, and parents were informed of death ... Indeed, a significant part of the children died due to the existing diseases and difficulties of aliyah, but no one killed them for sure.
      It is not entirely correct to assess those events from the standpoint of today's norms of behavior; the world of displaced persons in the post-war period lived by different standards.
      I repeat - the story is dirty, ambiguous, for many years hushed up by the judicial system where those very Polish Jews-socialists dominated.
    10. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 21: 08
      +1
      This story began in 1948. And in the same year, 1948, you presented everyone with a fact, declared your statehood. I hope that the disappearance of the Yemeni children at this particular time is a mere coincidence, and not something more.

      PS If you do find trustworthy information about the fate of children, give a link.
    11. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
      Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 21: 28
      -1
      The disappearance of children at this time is associated with the fact of the Yemeni Aliyah in 1948-50. Many horror stories (medical experiments, the many times overstated number of deaths) that have overgrown the very fact of the abduction of children are associated with the desire of lawyers who filed a class action lawsuit, with the desire (in many ways understandable) to receive not only recognition of the event, but also to receive compensation.
      As of today, the fact of the withdrawal of children has been recognized, the participation of the state has not been confirmed. On the other hand, the participation of people exposed by the government is confirmed.
  9. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
    Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 21: 37
    -1
    If you are really worried about such things, I advise you to watch the new series about the Yom Kippur War, VALLEY OF TEARS, it well shows the problem of relations between Europeans and Eastern Jews (there are Yemenis in particular) with a show of the Black Panther movement.
  10. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
    Alexzn (Alexander) 7 March 2021 19: 08
    -2
    I saw the operational planning material for Operation Unthinkable. It was these operational plans that were not recognized by the yukei government for a long time, and even Churchill assessed the mind games about a hypothetical situation called the Unthinkable as a preliminary sketch of what, I hope, is still a purely hypothetical probability (there was no point in hiding this at all).
  11. isofat Offline isofat
    isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 19: 35
    0
    Quote: AlexZN
    I saw the operational planning materials for the operation

    I didn’t see it. Proofs in the studio! smile
  12. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
    Ulysses (Alexey) 7 March 2021 17: 43
    +1
    Therefore, I will emphasize that the preamble to the operational plan was designed specifically for the Americans, on whom the passage about imposing the will on the Russians

    Are you really inadequate, or are you pretending?

    You have already been pointed out many times about the secrecy of the document.
    Including her degree. repeat
  13. isofat Offline isofat
    isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 18: 49
    +1
    Ulysses... We should first find out what exactly got the code name - Operation Unthinkable.

    The word operation in the title shouldn't fool us. It is necessary
    check the version, if this is really the case, maybe something else.

    Your opponent has a ready-made version, and he focuses on the speed of the plan. But this is only his desire, not supported by anything.

    PS Something I do not like this goose! (quote)
  • Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) 7 March 2021 09: 35
    -1
    Quote: Ulysses
    The general political goal (of the operation) is to impose the will of the United States and the British Empire on the Russians.

    although the “will” of the two countries can be viewed as a matter that directly concerns only Poland, it does not at all follow that the degree of our involvement (in the conflict) will certainly be limited

    Let's quote to the end. The plan concerned Poland.
    But the final plan was defensive.
    1. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 09: 57
      0
      Oleg Rambover, I haven't spoken to you for a long time, good afternoon.

      You are some kind of magician with us, what is this final plan, it’s not clear from where you got it out for everyone to see?

      I became firmly convinced that the defensive plan became the final plan, after you, without further ado, added the adjective "final" to it. I'm right?
      1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
        Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) 7 March 2021 10: 39
        -1
        You, in my opinion, are never right.
        Here is a photo of the original of two options for the operation is unthinkable.
        https://web.archive.org/web/20101116152301/http://www.history.neu.edu/PRO2/
        The last revision of the operation was dated July 45. (starting on page 29). It even has the word Final
        1. isofat Offline isofat
          isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 11: 05
          0
          Oleg Rambover, then what was given the code name, Operation Unthinkable, contained two plans - offensive and defensive.

          Don't act like an idiot by substituting final plan for final plan.
          1. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
            Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) 7 March 2021 15: 05
            0
            I still hope that you are posing as yourself, but every time I am convinced that no does not. Do you yourself understand what you wanted to say?
  • Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) 7 March 2021 10: 24
    0
    Let's start with the fact that the "scientific basis" for the future monstrous crimes of the possessed Fuhrer and his followers was just the Anglo-Saxons, who gave birth to the very concept of "higher" and "lower" races, as well as developed the doctrine of the "superiority of the Nordic peoples." Thomas Carlyle, Houston Chamberlain, James Hunt, Francis Galton (Charles Darwin's cousin, by the way), Carl Pearson are all British gentlemen, pundits.

    Does it smell like Nazism that all "Anglo-Saxons" are bad by definition?
    But what about Gerard Winstanley, Robert Owen, William Randall Creamer. The British do not compare, of course, with the contribution of the Germans and French to the communist movement, but still. The first communist party was formed in London. At the end of his last 30 years Marx spent in England and died there.
    Thinkers for every taste lived in England, and how many emigrants settled in England, including Lenin, Herzen, Ogarev and Kropotkin.
    1. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 10: 48
      0
      Quote: Oleg Rambover
      Thinkers for every taste lived in England ...

      Oleg Rambover... It smells like cannibalism, don’t you?

      But seriously, stop talking nonsense! We know that England had a bunch of colonies, the crimes of the British colonialists are well known. The commentator did not indicate the names of the Anglo-Saxons, so you can ask him. Instead, you start the song of the liberal.
  • isofat Offline isofat
    isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 11: 38
    -1
    I apologize to the author of the publication, you named the English gentlemen who indirectly had a hand in the Nazi theory, I bought into the liberal nonsense Oleg Rambover`but he was not entirely accurate in his comment.
  • Cyril Offline Cyril
    Cyril (Kirill) 7 March 2021 13: 07
    0
    And, by the way, the idea of ​​concentration camps the "supermen" of Germany also got from the sirs. The British were the first to create them in the world.

    And the Bolsheviks (as well as their opponents - whites) got the idea of ​​concentration camps "from the sirs". Long before the Nazis, back in the 20s, during the Civil War.

    And it would be okay to limit ourselves to the time of hostilities - but after all, concentration camps in the USSR remained after the Civil War.

    The propagandist Neukropny decided to omit this fact.

    We are talking, of course, about the "Iron Curtain", which became a frequently used idiom only "with the light hand" of Churchill. However, this phrase was not invented and used for the first time by him. He was very fond of propaganda doctor Joseph Goebbels - it is reliably known that in his printed "creations" he used this term more than once.

    This expression was also used by the French premier Clemenceau (in 1919) and the Russian philosopher Rozanov (in 1917).

    Let's start with the fact that the "scientific basis" for the future monstrous crimes of the possessed Fuhrer and his followers was just the Anglo-Saxons, who gave birth to the very concept of "higher" and "lower" races, as well as developed the doctrine of the "superiority of the Nordic peoples." Thomas Carlyle, Houston Chamberlain, James Hunt, Francis Galton (Charles Darwin's cousin, by the way), Carl Pearson are all British gentlemen, pundits.

    In an attempt to subvert history to propaganda, the necropic one again ignores data that are inconvenient for him.

    The first "scientific" racial theories were expressed by ancient philosophers and scientists.

    Among Russian scientists, the racial theory was also developing - in particular, the ethnographer Valentin Moshkov, the historian Stepan Eshevsky, the Russian and Soviet historian Nikolai Kareev expressed ideas about the difference and unequal value of races.

    Which, in general, was natural - after all, the Russian Empire was exactly the same colonial empire as the British (French, Belgian, etc.). And the level of development of science at that time was still too small for people to understand the untenable racial theory.

    Well, it's funny to read about British racism from an author who immediately writes:

    Note that such "peacekeeping forces" are not needed in any way to enlighten some native tribe Ili-orwho decided to arrange genocide neighboring tribe Barely.
    1. isofat Offline isofat
      isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 13: 52
      -1
      Cyril, personally, you have not listed everything that you did not mention in your small article Neurocrop... Apparently you are with Necropic at the same time, you are trying to ignore the data that is inconvenient for you, you are trying to sum up everything under propaganda.

      How could you not say about the role of Adam and Eve in this whole story? You are a propagandist!
      1. Cyril Offline Cyril
        Cyril (Kirill) 7 March 2021 14: 20
        -1
        Cyril, you personally did not list everything that Necropny did not mention in his small article.

        What I have listed is sufficient to assess the overall level of the entire article. If the author is lying in the first paragraphs, where the initial theses are postulated, he will lie throughout the article. Correct conclusions cannot be drawn from false theses. This is the law of logic with which you are not friends.

        How could you not say about the role of Adam and Eve in this whole story?

        The author wrote:

        Let's start with the fact that the "scientific basis" for the future monstrous crimes of the possessed Fuhrer and his followers was summed up just the Anglo-Saxons

        To this I replied that:

        First, representatives of ancient (Greek and Roman) science and philosophy began to provide a "scientific basis" for racial ideology long before British scientists and philosophers. Thus, I refuted the author's assertion that it was the British are the primary sources of scientific racism.

        Secondly, in the 19th century, racist theories were expressed not only by British, but also, for example, by Russian scientists and philosophers. Thus, I again refuted his claim that racism at the time wouldwas inherent only in the British.

        Therefore, your attack on Adam and Eve does not make any sense. With these "arguments" go to 123.
        1. isofat Offline isofat
          isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 15: 10
          +1
          Cyril. At first... You have not refuted the author, and you have not refuted him. They made unfounded statements - somewhere, once. All. But this is not enough either. You just need to ask the author a question, what is the meaning of words enclosed in quotation marks. Roughly speaking, anything can be the scientific basis in quotation marks.

          Secondly... The author nowhere claims that racism was inherent only in the British, and at that time too. It is not known what you are refuting there.

          For your information:... The division of humanity into biologically groups called by its supporters, racism, racial realism, or racial science is not supported by modern science. Modern scientific consensus rejects this view as incompatible with modern genetic research.
          1. Cyril Offline Cyril
            Cyril (Kirill) 7 March 2021 15: 25
            -1
            You have not refuted the author, and you have not refuted him. They made unfounded statements - somewhere, once.

            Why unfounded? I gave specific examples with surnames.

            You just need to ask the author a question, what is the meaning of words enclosed in quotation marks. Roughly speaking, anything can be the scientific basis in quotation marks.

            The concept of "scientific racism" has been studied in sufficient detail and has a clear interpretation. What does the author mean by these - his problems, not mine.

            The author nowhere claims that racism was inherent only in the British, and at that time too. It is not known what you are refuting there.

            The author said that the racial theories of the British in the 19th century were the source of German state racism. To which I showed with specific examples that "scientific racism" was widespread at that time (in the 19th century) everywhere - including in Russia. It was a general scientific problem at the time, not exclusively British.

            For reference. The division of humanity into biologically groups called by its supporters, racism, racial realism, or racial science is not supported by modern science. Modern scientific consensus rejects this view as incompatible with modern genetic research.

            I know this even without you.
            1. isofat Offline isofat
              isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 15: 47
              -1
              Cyril... If not for you, the site was boring. Tell me what is "scientific racism" even if scientific racism is unscientific? laughing

              Without this it is impossible in any way, I need to understand what you are "proving" with such persistence. laughing
              1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                Cyril (Kirill) 7 March 2021 15: 57
                -1
                Tell me what is "scientific racism" even if scientific racism is unscientific?

                If you are not able to look into the same Wikipedia yourself, then ok, okay. It is customary to help the flawed in Russia, so I will help you:

                Racial theory, rasology [1], scientific racism is a complex of theories and ideas about the decisive influence of racial differences on history, culture, social and state structure of people, about the existence of the superiority of some human races over others.

                I need to understand what you are "proving" with such persistence

                To understand what I am trying to prove, you need to have the following skills:

                - reading;

                - logical thinking.

                You still have problems with both skills.
                1. isofat Offline isofat
                  isofat (isofat) 7 March 2021 16: 12
                  0
                  Cyril... Your opinion about my person is not so valuable to me that I would be upset about your characteristics addressed to me.

                  Let's continue! "scientific racism" and scientific racism are different concepts. To get you this better, I will say that you are smart in quotes, "smart".

                  Further, until you define the concept with which you "fight", there is no point in talking. laughing
                  1. Cyril Offline Cyril
                    Cyril (Kirill) 7 March 2021 16: 17
                    -1
                    Let's continue! "scientific racism" and scientific racism are different concepts.

                    No, they are the same concept. I used it in quotation marks just so that you, as a particularly gifted person (and those like you), do not get the impression that scientific racism is really a scientific, and not a pseudoscientific theory. Whether I put it in quotes or not, the essence of the term "scientific racism" does not change.

                    To get you this better, I will say that you are smart in quotes, "smart".

                    Such "analogies" can only reach people with your kindergarten level of thinking. Up to 123, for example.
  • Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 March 2021 09: 02
    0
    Quote: 123
    What kind of enlightenment can we talk about when the followers of EBN are in power?

    Were Stalin's Followers Better?

    Stalin had no followers. There were people who gradually and consistently carried out a capitalist revenge, trampling on everything that he fought for.
  • Siberia1054 Offline Siberia1054
    Siberia1054 (Alexander Ivanovich) 10 March 2021 11: 06
    0
    It would be nice to remove the "disgusting" Englishwoman from the world map. Less stench would be. Hitler's teachers and followers MUST share his fate!