Aktiv pėr herė tė fundit: Aktiv pėr herė tė fundit : Kurrė
Nuk keni hyrė [Hyrje - Regjistrohu]

Version i printueshėm | Dėrgo pėr njė shok
Nėnshkruaj | Shtoni tek preferencat
Valter bejkova

Postuar mė 8-5-2005 nė 17:05 Edit Post Reply With Quote

Bush keqeardhje per Jalten

"Fundi i Luftes se Dyte Boterore ngriti pyetje te pashmangshme per vendin tim: A kemi luftuar dhe jemi sakrifikuar vetem per te arritur ne ndarjen e perhershme te Evropes ne dy kampe te armatosur?", shtroi pyetjen me gjysme zeri Bush, duke e coroditur median ruse

Presidenti amerikan George W. Bush shprehu dje me gjysme zeri keqardhje per paktin e Jaltes qe ndau me 1945 Evropen dhe vendosi rajonet qendrore dhe lindore nen kontrollin e Bashkimit Sovjetik. "Roberia e miliona njerezve ne Evropen Qendrore dhe Lindore do te kujtohet gjithnje si nje nga gabimet me te medha te historise", pohoi Bush gjate nje fjalimi ne Riga. "Fundi i Luftes se Dyte Boterore ngriti pyetje te pashmangshme per vendin tim: A kemi luftuar dhe jemi sakrifikuar vetem per te arritur ne ndarjen e perhershme te Evropes ne dy kampe te armatosur?", shtroi pyetjen Bush.

"Amerika dhe aleatet e saj me te forte moren vendimin te mos kenaqeshin vetem me clirimin e gjysmes se Evropes dhe te mos harronin miqte e tyre pas Perdes se Hekurt", theksoi ai. Presidenti amerikan pohoi se politika amerikane ishte te dobesonte Bashkimin Sovjetik derisa te rrezohej komunizmi nen presionin e jashtem dhe kontradiktat e tij". Duke pershendetur pavaresine e vendeve baltike te arritur me 1991, Bush theksoi se "kur ju u mblodhet per te protestuar dhe kur perandoria ra, trashegimia e Jaltes u zhduk njehere e pergjithmone". "Siguria dhe liria e vendeve baltike tashme eshte me shume sesa nje aspirate fisnike, eshte lidhja e aleances qe kemi te perbashket. Per te mbrojtur lirine tuaj, nuk do te jeni me kurre vetem", tha Bush.

Perpara Ceremonise

Perpara vizites ne Moske per ceremonine e dites se hene, qe shenon fitoren e vitit 1945 ndaj nazisteve, Bush u shpreh gjithashtu se SHBA-ja merr persiper disa pergjegjesi per ndarjen e Evropes per shkak te marreveshjes se Jaltes e nenshkruar ne fund te Luftes se Dyte Boterore. Bush shprehu keqardhje per kujtimet e hidhura te vendeve baltike ne periudhen e pasluftes, kur ishin nen kontrollin sovjetik deri ne arritjen e pavaresise ne vitin 1991. Duke bashkuar liderin sovjetik, Josef Stalin, kryeministrin britanik Einston Churchill dhe presidentin amerikan, Franklin Roosvelt, marreveshja e Jaltes pergatiti riorganizimin e pasluftes te Evropes. Bush shprehu keqardhje se kur u nenshkrua marreveshja "liria e vendeve te vogla ishte disi e pavlere". "Akoma kjo perpjekje per te sakrifikuar lirine per hir te stabilitetit le nje kontinent te ndare dhe te paqendrueshem. Roberia e miliona personave ne Evropen qendrore dhe lindore do te mbahet mend si nje nga gabimet me te medha ne histori", u shpreh ai.


View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member

Postuar mė 9-5-2005 nė 11:31 Edit Post Reply With Quote
Nje Artikull ne BBC per WW II


Who won World War II?
By Konstantin Rozhnov

The Nazi regime collapsed in May 1945, squeezed ever more tightly between two fronts - the

Soviet Union on one side and the Western Allies on the other.
But which of these fronts was the most important?

Allied aid to the Soviet Union, from food to lorries, played a vital role
Throughout the Cold War, and ever since, each side has tended to see its own contribution as


"In the West, for some time... public opinion has taken the view that the Soviet Union played

a secondary role," says the Russian historian Valentin Falin.

On the other hand, opinion polls show that two-thirds of Russians think the Soviet Union could

have defeated Hitler without the Allies' help, and half think the West underestimates the

Soviet contribution.

Ribbentrop's view

Richard Overy, professor of contemporary history at King's College London, notes that after

the war, Hitler's foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop listed three main reasons for

Germany's defeat:

Unexpectedly stubborn resistance from the Soviet Union
The large-scale supply of arms and equipment from the US to the Soviet Union, under the

lend-lease agreement
The success of the Western Allies in the struggle for air supremacy.
Because Britain and the US had to invade Europe by sea they have a sense of 'liberating' a

German-conquered Europe

Professor Richard Overy,
King's College London
Mr Overy says that for decades Soviet historians underplayed the significance of US and UK

lend-lease in the Soviet Union's success, but that Russia has recently shown just


Mr Falin, however, says Russians never forgot the help they received from their allies.

"You ask any Soviet person, whether he remembers what a Dodge or a Willis is!" he says.

"The Americans supplied us with 450,000 lorries. Of course, in the final stages of the war

this significantly increased our armed forces' mobility, decreased our losses and brought us,

perhaps, greater success than if we had not such help."


Mr Overy accepts that the Western powers played a smaller role on the battlefield itself than

the Soviet forces but says their bombing campaigns made a huge contribution.

POWs at Stalingrad: Most German losses were on the eastern front
"Bombing diverted a lot of manpower and military equipment from the front in Russia, while it

restricted the expansion of the German war economy," he says.

He also agrees that the West still only has a weak understanding of the Soviet Union's role.

"Because Britain and the US had to invade Europe by sea [Italy in 1943, and France in 1944]

they have more of a sense of 'liberating' a German-conquered Europe," he says.

Second front

Mr Falin, meanwhile, argues that the war could have been brought to an end more quickly if the

second front, in France, had been opened before 1944.

"How many millions of people would have remained alive?" he asks.

"Many death camps reached full power precisely in the second half of 1943 and in 1944."

Mr Overy says that the West has a view of the war as a global conflict, because of its fight

against Japan, for example, whereas the Soviet view is of a "national crusade to repel the


Mr Falin cites figures suggesting that German forces suffered 93% of their casualties on the

Soviet front and argues that this shows the Soviet contribution was decisive.

But he adds that every single US, UK, Canadian or other Allied soldier who died "made a big,

important and necessary contribution to the victory, which was a shared victory".

Une dergova reagimin tim qe vijon para 5 ditesh dhe akoma nuk a shpallen(besoj se nuk do ta shpallin)

Ribentrop is right, but he forgot to mention that German sense of superiority and "do it alone" mindset was the biggest contribution to lose the war.
Why the Allies did not invade earlier? One theory would be that calculations have been made about who will rule after the war and definitely continental Europe was to be excluded. That was the reason why eastern Europe was let to fall under Soviet rule. Millions more where to be
killed during the WWII and Cold war so Anglo-Saxons can rule, first by showing mercy(Marshal plan) and then creating NATO to save the continent.
This in return caused archenemies German and French to cooperate and create EU which now
stands as biggest rival to Anglo-Saksonian rule.
A successful attempt is made to starve continent with Oil that led to continents economic stagnation.
Are we ever going to end the WWII and rivalry between continent and Anglo-Saxons?

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Anton Ashta

Postuar mė 19-5-2005 nė 06:28 Edit Post Reply With Quote

Por sot, Shqypni, pa m´thuej si je?

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member

Powered by XMB 1.8 Partagium Beta Build 20110207PM
Developed By Aventure Media & The XMB Group © 2002
Procesi i kryer nė 0.0813971 sekonda, 27 pyetje