Germany’s New Morgenthau Plan.

ShahdagMountains

Diamond Member
Jan 16, 2012
7,707
6,467
1,928
Less than a year before the end of World War II, then U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau drew up a nightmarish plan to punish postwar Germany.

After the serial 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War, World War I, and World War II — along with the failed Versailles peace treaty of 1919 — the Allies in World War II wanted to ensure there would never again be an aggressive Germany powerful enough to invade its neighbors.

When the so-called Morgenthau Plan was leaked to the press in September 1944, at first it was widely praised. After all, it would supposedly render Germany incapable of ever starting another world war in Europe.

Morgenthau certainly envisioned a Carthaginian peace, designed to ensure a permanently deindustrialized, unarmed, and pastoral Germany.

Postwar Germany would have resembled something akin to the ancient, pre-civilized frontier that the first-century AD historian Tacitus wrote about in his Germania.

A tragic irony now abounds.

After World War II, the Truman administration rejected the notion of a pastoral, deindustrialized, and insecure Germany as a cruel prescription for poverty, hunger, and depopulation.

But now the German people themselves voted for their own updated version of Morgenthau’s plan — as they willingly reduced factory hours, curtailed power and fuel supplies, and struggled with millions of illegal aliens and porous borders.

Germans accept that they have no military to speak of that could protect their insecure borders — without a United States-led NATO.

Eighty years ago, Germany’s former conquerors rejected wrecking the defeated nation as too harsh. But now Germany is willfully pastoralizing, disarming, deindustrializing — and destroying — itself.


 
Less than a year before the end of World War II, then U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau drew up a nightmarish plan to punish postwar Germany.

After the serial 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War, World War I, and World War II — along with the failed Versailles peace treaty of 1919 — the Allies in World War II wanted to ensure there would never again be an aggressive Germany powerful enough to invade its neighbors.

When the so-called Morgenthau Plan was leaked to the press in September 1944, at first it was widely praised. After all, it would supposedly render Germany incapable of ever starting another world war in Europe.

Morgenthau certainly envisioned a Carthaginian peace, designed to ensure a permanently deindustrialized, unarmed, and pastoral Germany.

Postwar Germany would have resembled something akin to the ancient, pre-civilized frontier that the first-century AD historian Tacitus wrote about in his Germania.

A tragic irony now abounds.

After World War II, the Truman administration rejected the notion of a pastoral, deindustrialized, and insecure Germany as a cruel prescription for poverty, hunger, and depopulation.

But now the German people themselves voted for their own updated version of Morgenthau’s plan — as they willingly reduced factory hours, curtailed power and fuel supplies, and struggled with millions of illegal aliens and porous borders.

Germans accept that they have no military to speak of that could protect their insecure borders — without a United States-led NATO.

Eighty years ago, Germany’s former conquerors rejected wrecking the defeated nation as too harsh. But now Germany is willfully pastoralizing, disarming, deindustrializing — and destroying — itself.



The Soviets actually implemented part of the plan, as they took every still semi-functioning industrial tool and plant and shipped them back to Russia. That and they kept POW's for up to a decade as a form of free labor.

The Soviets only started really rebuilding East Germany after the Marshall Plan proved to be effective in restarting Western Europe's economies, and their hope for communist revolution in Western Europe was dashed.
 
Less than a year before the end of World War II, then U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau drew up a nightmarish plan to punish postwar Germany.

After the serial 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian War,

Was declared from France.

World War I,

Was declared from Russia when they declared themselves to be the protective power of all Slaws in Europe after they tried to genocide the Poles who lived in their part of Poland in Russia.

and World War II

Was started together from Stalin and Hitler in the secret part of the Molotow-Ribbentrop pact where Stalin and Hitler decided to eliminate Poland again.

Indeed thirteen European powers overtook about 2/3rd of the Holy Roman Empire and it could be if the Holy Roman Empire (=Germany) still would exist the people who lived once there would even still today prefer to be "German" (= deutsch = to belong together).

— along with the failed Versailles peace treaty of 1919 — the Allies in World War II wanted to ensure there would never again be an aggressive Germany powerful enough to invade its neighbors.

When the so-called Morgenthau Plan was leaked to the press in September 1944, at first it was widely praised. After all, it would supposedly render Germany incapable of ever starting another world war in Europe.

Morgenthau certainly envisioned a Carthaginian peace, designed to ensure a permanently deindustrialized, unarmed, and pastoral Germany. ...

The Carthagians had been widped out from the Romans - and even 300 years later they still lived in fear the Carthagians could come back and take revenge. By the way: The French still live in fear of the Austrians - who had been the last German emperors and who had dissolved the Holy Roman Empire in 1806 because of Napoleon Bonaparte. And still today live the former allies of world war 1+2 in fear of Germany and that we could take revenge for the crimes and genocides the allies of World War 1 and 2 had done.

And most Germans had by the way agreed with the Morgenthau plan. The only problem: In this case the allies had to kill about 80%-90% of all Germans and I'm sure they would had done so because their war had also been a war of destruction - but in this case they had to take care of the Russians on their own to whom they had yet given a very big part of Europe.
 
Last edited:
... after the Marshall Plan proved to be effective in restarting Western Europe's economies ...

What's a myth. The Marshall plan was not effective for the European economies. Example: The German government had to subvention the Marshall plan because the Marshall plan did not send money but goods from the USA. This goods from the USA had been so extraordinary expensive that no one was able to buy them. The Marshal plan was first of all good for the USA to turn back from a war economy into a civil society after world war 2. And for Germany it was specially important on psychologcial reasons. That's why no one liked to touch this myth.
 
Last edited:
... Germany would have resembled something akin to the ancient, pre-civilized frontier that the first-century AD historian Tacitus wrote about in his Germania

A "Germania" which never had existed because never any "German" had been a "German". The word "German" is only a myth from foreigners. A fantasy product. Only a wide summary of languages is "German" - as is English for example or Yiddish, or Dutch, or Swiss, or ... The German speaking Swiss for example are basing on the Celtic tribe "Helvetii". And by the way: "France" is a German word.
 
Last edited:
A "Germania" which never had existed because never any "German" had been a "German". The word "German" is only a myth from foreigners. A fantasy product. Only a wide summary of languages is "German" - as is English for example or Yiddish, or Dutch, or Swiss, or ... The German speaking Swiss for example are basing on the Celtic tribe "Helvetii".

Do you know what “Taunus” means?
 
Try again.

What do you like to say? Taunus looks like a Latin word ... a region around "monte tauno". But "Tauno" is a karelian name (Finland) so it looks like the root of this word for this mountain (near Friedberg?) could be older than the Indo-Germanic languages in Europe. "Tauno" means "peaceful, modest". Question: Did you ever compare Gießen (not far from Friedberg as far as I know) and Marburg with each other? If you do so then you will see that Gießen would normally be like Marburg - but it lost totally it's historical character because it had been bombed down from the allies. An irrevocable loss.
 
Last edited:
What do you like to say? Taunus is a Latin word ... a region around "monte tauno". "Tauno" is a karelian name (Finland) so it looks like the root of this word for this mountain could be older than the Indo-Germanic languages in Europe.

It’s a Celtic word, for mountains.
 
It’s a Celtic word, for mountains.

Are you sure? Latin and Celtic are very near. And the word for mountain is "mons". ... One moment - do you like to say to me that in Germany exists a low mountain region which is called "Taunus". Do you like to carry owls to Athens?

Here the exact region:

Karte_Deutschland_Taunus_2.png


What is your problem?
 
Last edited:
What's a myth. The Marshall plan was not effective for the European economies. Example: The German government had to subvention the Marshall plan because the Marshall plan did not send money but goods from the USA. This goods from the USA had been so extraordinary expensive that no one was able to buy them. The Marshal plan was first of all good for the USA to turn back from a war economy into a civil society after world war 2. And for Germany it was specially important on psychologcial reasons. That's why no one liked to touch this myth.

Bullshit. Europe was ravaged and the economies recovered in about a decade due to American economic support.
 
Versailles "created" Hitler. We didn't sign off on that treaty.

I am convinced "you" (= the USA alone) is responsible for all results of World War 1 including Versailles. You alone changed the flow of world history - otherwise the multinational empires had won against the national and colonial empires. But all "solutions" of World War 1 exploded and are still exploding.
 
Last edited:
I am convinced "you" (= the USA alone) is responsible for all results of World War 1 including Versailles. You alone changed the flow of world history - otherwise the multinational empires had won against the national and colonial empires. But all "solutions" of World War 1 exploded and are still exploding.

And I'm convinced you are a revisionist fruitcake.
 
And I'm convinced you are a revisionist fruitcake.

What means "revisionist" in this context? I'm perhaps a disillusionist. Or do you really think the destruction of the Osman Empire and the destruction of the Austrian-Hungarian empire was a real success? "You" created in World War 1 not only Nazis and Commies. You created also Islamists. And totally weird nationalisms and borders all over the world.
 
Last edited:
What means "revisionist" in this context? I'm perhaps a disillusionist. Or do you really think the destrcutioon of the Osman Empire and the destruction of the Austrian-Hungarian empire was a success? "You" created in World War 1 not only Nazis and Commies. You created also Islamists.

The French were the ones who pushed for harsh terms, and the British were not far behind. The Russians were to busy with the Civil war to participate.

Are you saying all those slavs and poles and balts should have been forced to join the German and Austro hungarian empires against their wills?
 

Forum List

Back
Top