Talk:Cold War (1948–1953)

message: I've come across some online documents while doing research for the article the Morgenthau Plan.
I thought this was a very good document collection: 
:: http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/marshall/large/index.php
The main theme is an assortment of documents relating to how the marshal plan originated and developed (covers the period 1946 - 1967), but some documents are equaly relevant to the beginings of the cold war, and I think some might make a good source for material about the birth of the European Union (maybe something to bite into?). I've already inserted one of the documents into the weblinks section a few days back. 
*Draft, Report on Communist Expansion, February 28, 1947
An example of another document:
"The Ruhr - The Times' article and editorial on the breach in the US ranks on the subject of the Ruhr were accurate, and the latter excellent. I have been disturbed over the arena in which the debate has been carried out. Clay and Draper claim that Germany will go communist shortly after any proposal to infringe on its sovereignity over the Ruhr is carried out;".
:Ruhr Delegation of the United States of America, Council of Foreign Ministers American Embassy Moscow, March 24, 1947
It would not surprise me if there is also a main collection of documents relating to the cold war, but I have not looked. I leave it to those more intrested in the subject (I.e with time to spare...).
The Truman library also contains oral history interviews with a lot of government characters that were deeply involved at ::the time. Fascinating reading. For instance: http://www.trumanlibrary.org/oralhist/kindbrgr.htm#25 Not that much about ::the cold war, but nevertheles.
Finaly I think, the U.K. National archives have a lot to offer. I've already posted this bit in the main article talk page, but as noone seems to have read it I do a double posting. The full war cabinet meetings documents (along with a lot... of other documents) are available as pdf, a bit hard to read though, as they are in shorthand, exactly as the secretary wrote down the conversations. This page gives the gist of a conversation about russia.
:: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/releases/2006/january/january1/review.htm
At the Cabinet meeting in April 1945 the PM welcomed representatives of the Dominions to the meeting during which they reviewed the world situation.  The PM and Jan Smuts, the South African Prime Minister, made some interesting comments on how they saw the world at the time:
P.M.
R. 
relations have deteriorated since Yalta…Hope we shall get through:
but only by unity.  New balance (or lack of balance) of power in
Europe.
These are the dominating world facts.  How can we match them?
Only by our superior statecraft & experience & above all by our Unity…
Smuts. …World needs our maturity & experience.  Danger of power suddenly
acquired w´out experience & mature responsibility – exemplified
by Germany & Japan.  Hope won´t be true of U.S. & Russia.
We have renounced Imperialism.  But what of the economic
imperialism of U.S.A. & the ideological imperialism of U.S.S.R.
Eire is a warning tht. we may easily break up, as did Roman Empire.
W.M.(45)39th Meeting held on 3 April 1945.
At the meeting of the caretaker Cabinet in June 1945 the PM gave his views of de Gaulle and the Russian advance into the heart of central Europe. The latter is almost a forerunner of his Iron Curtain speech:
P.M.
But no hope of trustworthy relations with France until we are rid of 
de Gaulle.
This advance of R. into heart of central Europe will be one
of most terrible events in history.  Don´t believe they will
willingly go back at least in this generation.  10 European
capitals fall into R. hands.
W.M.(45)7th Meeting held on 11 June 1945.
:: Hope at least some of this was useful to your work.
Stor stark7 21:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documents 

message: As the text now stands, it implies that Roosevelt was not intrested in punitive measures against germany. This is false:
::see Post-Surrender Program for Germany, Roosevelt Presidential Library
::Se also this critisism of Roosevelts plans in a note from his secretary of War:
Henry L. Stimson, Secretary of War. dated September 5, 1944. 
"We contemplate the transfer from Germany of ownership of East Prussia, Upper Silesia, Alsace' and Lorraine (each of them except the first containing raw materials of importance) together with the imposition of general economic controls. We also are considering the wisdom of a possible partition of Germany into north and south sections, as well as the creation of an internationalized State in the Ruhr. With such precautions, or indeed with only some of them, it certainly should not be necessary for us to obliterate all industrial productivity in the Ruhr area, in order to preclude its future misuse.
Nor can I agree that it should be one of our purposes to hold the German population "to a subsistence level" if this means the edge of poverty."
:: So basically, if there was any intention not to repeat the mistakes of the Versailles treaty, then these intentions should be referenced and attributed to Roosevelts successor Truman, who in time slowly managed to turn the U.S. administration away from the dangerous course set by his predecessor.
This report of the situation in 1947 shows how difficult it was for Truman to get parts of the U.S. administration to give up their plans for turning Germany into a nation of destitute peasants. 
Stor stark7 18:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two visions of the World 

message: I've added the following text to the important documents section.
*Speech by James F. Byrnes,  United States Secretary of State "Restatement of Policy on Germany" Stuttgart September 6, 1946.  Also known as the "Speech of hope" it set the tone of future U.S. policy as it repudiated the Morgenthau Plan economic policies and gave the Germans hope for the future. The Western powers worst fear by now was that the poverty and hunger would drive the Germans to Communism. General Lucius Clay stated "There is no choice between being a communist on 1,500 calories a day and a believer in democracy on a thousand". The speech was also seen as a stand against the Soviet Union as it stated the firm intention of the United States to maintain a military presence in Europe indefinitely. But the heart of the message was as Byrnes stated a month later "The nub of our program was to win the German people . . . it was a battle between us and Russia over minds. . . ."
Some related external links are
* James Francis Byrnes and U.S. Policy towards Germany 1945-1947 Deutsch-Amerikanische Zentrum / James-F.-Byrnes-Institut e.V
* U.K. Policy towards Germany National Archives excerpts of Cabinet meetings.
* CNN Iron Curtain.
--Stor stark7 Talk 21:32, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Stuttgart Speech 

message: I've added the following text on the reversal of JCS 1067:
In view of increased concerns by General Lucius D. Clay and the Joint Chief of Staff over growing communist influence in Germany, as well as of the of the failure of the rest of the European economy to recover without the German industrial base on which it previously had been dependent, in the summer of 1947 Secretary of State General George Marshall, citing "national security grounds" was finally able to convince President Harry S. Truman to rescind the punitive U.S. occupation directive JCS 1067, and replace it with JCS 1779.  In July 1947 JCS 1067, which had directed the U.S. forces of occupation in Germany to "…take no steps looking toward the economic rehabilitation of Germany", was thus replaced by JCS 1779 which instead stressed that "An orderly, prosperous Europe requires the economic contributions of a stable and productive Germany". JCS 1067 had then been in effect for over two years.
Some sources:
*Pas de Pagaille! Time Magazine, Jul. 28, 1947.
*The Road Ahead: Lessons in Nation Building from Japan, Germany, and Afghanistan for Postwar Iraq, by Ray Salvatore Jennings May 2003, Peaceworks No. 49, United States Institute of Peace pg. 14-15
And for those intrested, a link to the text of the directive.
* Joint Chiefs of Staff Directive 1067 JCS 1067/6 of 28 April 1945 (The final version, JCS 1067/8 of 10 May 1945, contained an amendment allowing the production of just enough synthetic rubber and oil, aluminum, and magnesium to meet the needs of the Allied occupying forces, where the previous version (JCS 1067/6) had ordered the complete destruction of such industries.) 
--Stor stark7 Talk 19:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Added text on the reversal of JCS 1067

message: In contrast to the Eastern Bloc article, the article subject is more narrow, namely, it tells about political and military confrontation between two political and military blocks. Therefore, it seems reasonable to stop using a vague term "Eastern bloc" and to use Warsaw pact" instead. Accordingly, the Eastern bloc map should be replaced with the Warsaw pact vs NATO map, because some socialist countries, like Yugoslavia or Albania weren't the USSR's allies, and, therefore, didn't participate in that confrontation.--Paul Siebert (talk) 19:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely not on the map, as it obviously depicts the creation of the Eastern Bloc in the 1940s, not the 1955 Warsaw Pact foundation (would be nonsensical in the 1940s).  But in the text where the Warsaw Pact later takes action -- e.g., the '68 Czechoslovakian invasion -- the term Warsaw Pact should be used instead of the Eastern Bloc.Mosedschurte (talk) 19:12, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.--Paul Siebert (talk) 21:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creation of the Eastern Bloc 

message: A user involved in pushing Soviet POV on numerous articles just changed "Fraudulent Polish elections" (1947) to "First Polish elections". Any user who's in doubt of the whether the fraudulent elections were fraudulent should read up on the article on the Polish legislative election, 1947. Already the introduction points out that "The anti-communist opposition candidates and activists were persecuted and the eventual results were falsified" and that "The elections were not free". All mainstream scholars agree that those elections were fraudulent. Describing them as "First Polish elections" is revisionist. Virgil Lasis (talk) 19:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fraudulent Polish elections

message: The Soviets supported the idea of the partition plan because they wanted the Brittish Empire out of the Middle East so they could enjoy their intrests in the Middle East. In addition, the Soviets supported the Jews by supplying a big mass of weapons (through Czechoslovakia) during the Israeli-Arab war of 1948 mainly because the Israeli leadership was comprised of an absolute percentage of Socilists that migrated from Russia (including Poland, Ukraine and Belarus that were under Russia's controll in the first years of the settlement in the land). In 1949, following the elections in Israel, socialist proclaimed parties won more then 50% of the country's parlament.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bolter21 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israel's war of independence had a part in these period of the Cold War 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cold War (1947–1953). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110709171352/http://www.poloniatoday.com/history13.htm to http://www.poloniatoday.com/history13.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070228220638/http://www.remuseum.org.uk/corpshistory/rem_corps_part19.htm to http://www.remuseum.org.uk/corpshistory/rem_corps_part19.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:56, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified