Civil War ?

[Tsontos]

Originally Posted by Nikos

Donate Macedonia to Yugoslavia!! HAHAHAHAHA

Where did you see it? Conspired with Stalin and Tito?
This is hilarious. And Taki STOP ADDRESSING TO ME PERSONALLY!!

Istor, this is the Greek history that you teach children at school?

we need to look past the stupidity of this post and ask ourselves why would nikos refuse to beleive what is common knowledge and supported by numerous documents from Greek communists, AMericans, Yugoslavs.

It wouldnt be because Nikov wants to beleive Tito made Vardarska Banovina 'Socialist Republic of Macedonia' because of his good will to the long sufffering 'Macedonian people'

Istor, this is the Greek history that you teach children at school?

But I thought you were Greek as well? are you still in Athens nikov?

[akritas]

Originally Posted by Nikos

Half of the Democratic Army where Akrita? and when?
Only in the western Macedonia and at the ending phase.

In the mountains of Thessaly were half of them Slavophones?
In the mountains of Peloponese?
In makronissos where half of them Slavs?

And don't confuse the term Slavophones with Slavs or ethnic Macedonians.

Akrita discuss a little bit the case with some elderly.

Read my FIRST post Niko.

I said in the end of the Greek Civil War
Bgale tis tsimples apo ta matia sou ean eisai Ellinas opos les


edit
And as about my confusion and your ethnic macedonians you are the only one that support this term.

[Nikos]

Given that the end of the Greek civil war war played at the area of Grammos-Vitsi in western Macedonia where the Slavophone element prevails, it is apparent that many of the warriors were Slavophones.
But this doesn't make the Greek civil war an ethnic war.
It is clear.

[Amarantos]

Originally Posted by Nikos

Split Greece? was there such plan?

"...To Κομμα δεν παυει να διακηρυττει πως τελικα και οριστικα το μακεδονικο ζητημα θα λυθει αδελφικα μετα τη νικη της Σοβιετικης εξουσιας στα Βαλκανια που θα σκισει τις ατιμες συνθηκες της ανταλλαγης των πληθυσμων για τις οποιες το κομμα θα παρει ολα τα πραχτικα μετρα,ωστε να εξαλειφθουν οι ιμπεριαλιστικες τους αδικιες.Μονον τοτε ο Μακεδονικος Λαος θα βρει την πλερια εθνικη του αποκατασταση"(6ο συνεδριο ΚΚΕ,1935/Το ΚΚΕ,Επισημα Κειμενα τομος δ',σελ.297).
One can easily understand what the intentions of KKE were.Those put in practice during civil war with the name "limnes".

Originally Posted by Nikos

The leader of the Communist party of Greece was clearly following Stalin's instructions.

ΣΤΑΛΙΝ/πιστευετε οτι η επανασταση στην Ελλαδα μπορει να επιτυχει?
ΚΑΡΝΤΕΛΙ/ναι,αν δεν αναμειχθουν ξενες δυναμεις και αν δεν γινουν πολιτικα και στρατιωτικα λαθη.
ΣΤΑΛΙΝ/παντοτε τα "εαν" και τα "αλλα".ΟΧΙ!Δεν υπαρχει καμια πιθανοτης επιτυχιας.Τι νομιζετε λοιπον?Οτι η Μεγαλη Βρετανια και οι Ηνωμενες Πολιτειες,το ισχυροτερο κρατος στον κοσμο,θα μας επιτρεψουν να διακοψουμε τις συγkοινωνιες τους στη Μεσογειο?Κουταμαρες!Και,επιπλεον,δεν εχουμε στολο.Η επανασταση πρεπει να σταματησει μολις αυτο θα ειναι δυνατο.(Μιλοβαν Τζιλας,"Συνομιλιες με τον Σταλιν".Νεα Υορκη 1962,αγγλικη εκδοση.Κυκλοφορησε επισης γαλλικη και ελληνικη εκδοση)

Obviously the leaders of KKE were not following Stalins orders any more,since he was always in line with the Yalta agreement.That's the reason why the soviet army stopped in Bulgaria and did not descend to Greece.The leaders of KKE were serving Tito!He was the one who wanted a new soviet empire,this time in balkans,with himself as the emperor.And that last thing was the reason why he split with Stalin.

Originally Posted by Nikos

Stalin had signed with Churchill and Russvelt the Yalta agreement, according to which Greece would go under the English-American influence.

the agreement also included:Yugoslavia:50% russian-50% others("Memoirs", Winston S. Churchill)
And that was Tito's political geniality.Take advantage of both russians-in the beginning- and the West-after the break up with Stalin-.The only way for KKE leadership to make true it's plans was take shelter under Tito's wings,sacrifising Greek blood,from both sides,those who were always against their plans and those who served the red idea without even knowing,after fighting the nazis,what they were fighting for.Tito tried to achieve his plans with the cooperation of KKE leadership,using and damaging Greek people.That's why the responsibilities of KKE are more than enormous.

In the end,Tito ,according to the agreements that he managed to take advantage of,abbandoned his comrades and left Zachariadis with his useless and pathetic confessions that in no way make him innocent.

[akritas]

Amarantos nice try.
Nikos if he is Greek, personally I belived that he is communist (not Greek) knows very well what was the Resolution of the Sixth Congress of the Greek Communist Party in 1935.
Skopjians and specially Stefou used these documents.
Like this

[Nikos]

First of all I am not communist.
But on the other hand we have to respect the Greek history.

Akrita and Amarante please read a little bit more carefully the texts you provide prior to concluding.

Akrita's texts clearly says that in the year 1935 the Greek communists were proposing to change the old moto :"independent Macedonia" to "equality to all minorities". Where are the split plans?

Also Amaranto's text :

"...To Κομμα δεν παυει να διακηρυττει πως τελικα και οριστικα το μακεδονικο ζητημα θα λυθει αδελφικα μετα τη νικη της Σοβιετικης εξουσιας στα Βαλκανια που θα σκισει τις ατιμες συνθηκες της ανταλλαγης των πληθυσμων για τις οποιες το κομμα θα παρει ολα τα πραχτικα μετρα,ωστε να εξαλειφθουν οι ιμπεριαλιστικες τους αδικιες.Μονον τοτε ο Μακεδονικος Λαος θα βρει την πλερια εθνικη του αποκατασταση"(6ο συνεδριο ΚΚΕ,1935/Το ΚΚΕ,Επισημα Κειμενα τομος δ',σελ.297).

Where is the split plan re Amarante? When saying "Sovietiki exousia" they mean "Communism". And it was also said in 1935 and not in 1945. Many things had changed in those 10 years.

The second Amaranto's text is pointless.


At the third part of Amaranto's post, it is concluded that the leadership of the Greek Communist Party (KKE) was following Tito's instructions.
Amarante first time in my life I hear this.

The leadership of KKE was clearly following Stalin. This is the reason why after the Yalta Treaty the Greek Communists signed the Varkiza agreement, despite the fact that the communists had then the control of the countryside.

Also after Stalin-Tito divorce at around 1947, Tito stopped supplying the Greek rebels and the rebellion little after collapsed (1948). These are historic facts. Why do you keep on denying them and invent new theories?

You very well noted that Stalin followed the line of the Yalta agreement and his troops stopped in Bulgaria, despite the fact that they could easily come to the south and stop at Tainaron Cape.

I would like to ask you: If Tito wanted the exit to the sea, why didn't he invade Greece little after the Germans left, the moment that he had overwhelmingly superior troops in Skopje, Tito's follower KKE (as you say) that controlled all the country, and absolutely no opposition?

Anyway I agree with you about Zachariadis. He finally suicided in exile in Siberia, in home detantion for 8 years with a KGBite outside his door (maybe Poutin), forgotten by everyone (except for KGB). He had the end that he deserved.

I agree that the KKE has historic responsibilities, but on the other hand should they be accredited for their resistance against the Nazis?
The resistance against the Germans doesn't make you proud Greeks?

But what about the other side?
What about Panagiotis Kanelopoulos who after the civil war presented the Greek army to US general Van Fleet and said: "General this is your army, your orders please".

What about the below depicted gentlemen who during the occupation were assisting the Germans to slay Distomo Lagada, Kalavryta etc, and who after WWII were found ruling the country?

[akritas]

What is supposing to do the Ohrana,Tagmatasfalites with the Slavs that participated in the Democratic Army ?
Maybe Ohrana is related because were Boulgars as also and the Slavs!!!!

[Istor]

It is GOD of Greece that led Tito against Stalin and thus saved us from slavization.

Kala re agrammate, auto: "Μονον τοτε ο Μακεδονικος Λαος θα βρει την πλερια εθνικη του αποκατασταση" pws to katalavaineis ??

Poios se anagkazei na propsoieisai oti eisai vlakas, mou les ??

[Amarantos]

Originally Posted by Nikos

First of all I am not communist.

So,you are a communist.There is nothing wrong.Don't worry.Nobody is perfect .
I was just kidding.I have already written though that the way you deny things simply demonstrates how you are positive to them.In the past you wrote "i don't want to change anybody's mind" which translated means "i want to change somebody's mind".If you don't understand what i mean please take what i've written as a personal effort to explain your thoughts.

Originally Posted by Nikos

But on the other hand we have to respect the Greek history.

So for the respect of the History ...

Originally Posted by Nikos

Akrita's texts clearly says that in the year 1935 the Greek communists were proposing to change the old moto :"independent Macedonia" to "equality to all minorities". Where are the split plans?

Also Amaranto's text :

"...To Κομμα δεν ......εθνικη του αποκατασταση"(6ο συνεδριο ΚΚΕ,1935/Το ΚΚΕ,Επισημα Κειμενα τομος δ',σελ.297).

Where is the split plan re Amarante? When saying "Sovietiki exousia" they mean "Communism". And it was also said in 1935 and not in 1945. Many things had changed in those 10 years.

They definitely mean Communism.You surely know that the "macedonian question" existed before 1935.All balkan communistic parties were aware of this question since the third International and commited themselves to resolve it in the frame of a "Balkan communistic federation".That is the line that Tito himself followed!
As you probably know in communistic texts(apart Zachariadis semi-true confessions) one can't easily realize what is hidden behind words.So you have to read bewteen the lines!The goal of KKE leaders was to split the country,demonstrated also by several events as:
The speech of KKE representative Miltiadis Porfyrogenis in Strasbourg on 27 June 1947 according to which...
"και η αποφασιστικη πολεμικη επιδοση και αναπτυξη του δημοκρατικου στρατου της Ελλαδας ...αναγκαστικα τεινει να αποκρυσταλλωθει και αποκρυσταλλωνεται κιολας,προς τη δημιουργια μιας λευτερης και δημοκρατικης Ελλαδας με δικη της κυβερνηση και με δικη της κρατικη υποσταση.Για ενα τετοιο πραγμα υπηρχαν και πριν και σημερα ,ολες οι απαραιτητες αντικειμενικες ,πολεμικες,υλικες,πολιτικες,ηθικες,ψυχολογικες μα και γεωγραφικες προυποθεσεις".(Ριζοσπαστης,28 Ιουνιου 1947)
So what is this text saying?
What was the reason of existance of the "temporary goverment of the mountains" before and after the removal of Vafiadis and the nomination of Partsalidis as "prime minister" in 1949 with a couple of yugoslavs as his "ministers"?
To avoid misunderstandings i remind you that democratic countries were considered by communists only the communistic countries.

The same so called plan "limnes" had the purpose to separate greece,and was eliminated also by patriotic red colonel Bakirtzis who definitely did not followed the KKE leadership orders for the separation of Macedonia from Greece.That was the reason why members of KKE were killed by SNOF agents.Because they did not followed official political KKE leadership line and behaved as Greeks.
In the same time why Zachariadis was meeting Tito and his minister Rankovic in Belgrad?

Originally Posted by Nikos

The second Amaranto's text is pointless.

Pointless???Pointless the testimony of yugoslav officials?It simply proves a fact that you are denying.The fact that the KKE did not considered Mosca's orders(repeated in various occasions by Dimitrov)and served Tito's projects.

Originally Posted by Nikos

At the third part of Amaranto's post, it is concluded that the leadership of the Greek Communist Party (KKE) was following Tito's instructions.Amarante first time in my life I hear this.

My dear Nikos...The more you live the more you learn!!!
You obviously avoid to see the facts.

Originally Posted by Nikos

The leadership of KKE was clearly following Stalin. This is the reason why after the Yalta Treaty the Greek Communists signed the Varkiza agreement, despite the fact that the communists had then the control of the countryside.

The Varkiza agreement was a realistic capitulation of the left wingers to the reality.It is easily demonstrated that KKE did not have intention to remain faithfull to the agreement it signed...
"προτου ακομη ελθουν οι δικοι μας απο τη Βαρκιζα,εγω ειχα σκεφτει πως ειτε κανουμε συμφωνια ειτε οχι,πρεπει να κρυψουμε οπλισμο και να τον χρησιμοποιησουμε σε ωρα αναγκης που μπορουσε να μας παρουσιασθει...Η δουλεια εγινε παντου...Εκεινοι που θα κρυψουνε τον οπλισμο θα φυγουν για το Μπουλκες,ωστε να μην πιαστουν και πει κανεις οτι κρυψαμε οπλισμο.."(Γιαννης Ιωαννιδης,οργανωτικος γραμματεας του ΚΚΕ,"Αναμνησεις")

Originally Posted by Nikos

Also after Stalin-Tito divorce at around 1947, Tito stopped supplying the Greek rebels and the rebellion little after collapsed (1948). These are historic facts. Why do you keep on denying them and invent new theories?

The Stalin-Tito divorce took place in the beggining of summer of 1948.
Tito interrupted the political and military help he was providing on July 1949.These are the historic facts that i do not deny.
How do you explain though Titos u-turn?
Why did he stop supporting the rebels?

Originally Posted by Nikos

You very well noted that Stalin followed the line of the Yalta agreement and his troops stopped in Bulgaria, despite the fact that they could easily come to the south and stop at Tainaron Cape.

I would like to ask you: If Tito wanted the exit to the sea, why didn't he invade Greece little after the Germans left, the moment that he had overwhelmingly superior troops in Skopje, Tito's follower KKE (as you say) that controlled all the country, and absolutely no opposition?

On September 1944,Erythriadis(person in charge of KKE delegation)goes to bulgaria where he meets russian military officer Tolbuchin ,asking him to enter in Greece.He,the russian, denies it according to Mosca's policy.
On Dicember 1944,Tempo(Svetozar Vukmanovic) after agreement with rappresentative of KKE Tzimas in Belgrad,decided to enter to Thessaloniki.Bakirtzis prevented this prospect destroying near Florina what he called...
"σταση 2 ταγματων του ΕΛΑΣ...Οι ανταρτες μας,φρουρoι των εθνικων μας συνορων,πηραν τη διαταγη να εμποδισουν με τα οπλα την εισοδο των φυγαδων στασιαστων στο Ελληνικο εδαφος...Η Μακεδονια και Δ. Θρακη ηταν και θα παραμεινουν Ελληνικες Επαρχιες".
(Ευριπιδη Μπακιρτζη,"Μελετες,λογοι,σημειωσεις",1981)

One can easily see that Tito tried to do so after arrangement with KKE,but he(and KKE leaders)did not calculated all parameters.One of which was the real national voice of EAM and ELAS.A voice that the KKE leadership did not want to hear.Instead,despite Mosca's clear instructions,KKE leadership brings Greece to the national division and serves the interests of Tito,who in any case remains "at safe" by the West powers,occuppied in the Greek civil war,and freely constructs his state,putting also the foundations of what he'll call "socialist republic of macedonia"

Originally Posted by Nikos

Anyway I agree with you about Zachariadis. He finally suicided in exile in Siberia, in home detantion for 8 years with a KGBite outside his door (maybe Poutin), forgotten by everyone (except for KGB). He had the end that he deserved.

I understand why you agree with me on Zachariadis.With his confessions by semi-revealing the truth on Tito's intentions against Greece he becomes an inconvenient and unconfortable comrade.Semi- because remaining faithfull to his mercenary behaviour,hides his own responsabilities.

Originally Posted by Nikos

What about Panagiotis Kanelopoulos who after the civil war presented the Greek army to US general Van Fleet and said: "General this is your army, your orders please".

This is demagoguery.According to the Truman Dogma the US would protect the Greek freedom from soviet scheming.So,what is so strange?Wasn't that the Yalta agreement?

Originally Posted by Nikos

What about the below depicted gentlemen who during the occupation were assisting the Germans to slay Distomo Lagada, Kalavryta etc, and who after WWII were found ruling the country?

And how about gentlemen like Tsipas(first KKE secretary)and Tzimas,arrested by Metaxas regime and liberated during nazi occupation of Greece after indication of the bulgarian ambassador of Filov goverment in Athens?
Ioannidis in his "Memories"(Γιαννη Ιωαννιδη,"Αναμνησεις",1979) recalls:
"...ο Τσιπας...ηξερε τα καθηκοντα του κομματος.Μιλησαμε συγκεκριμενα και ιδιαιτερα πολλες ωρες.Ακομη και τη στιγμη που ηρθε να τους παρει ο Γερμανος με το Βουλγαρο γραμματεα."
definitely not with the goal to execute them for their resistance against the nazis.

[Nikos]

First of all I repeat that I am not a Communist, and I want no one to change their mind. I want only to discuss.

You provided this text:

"και η αποφασιστικη πολεμικη επιδοση και αναπτυξη του δημοκρατικου στρατου της Ελλαδας ...αναγκαστικα τεινει να αποκρυσταλλωθει και αποκρυσταλλωνεται κιολας,προς τη δημιουργια μιας λευτερης και δημοκρατικης Ελλαδας με δικη της κυβερνηση και με δικη της κρατικη υποσταση.Για ενα τετοιο πραγμα υπηρχαν και πριν και σημερα ,ολες οι απαραιτητες αντικειμενικες ,πολεμικες,υλικες,πολιτικες,ηθικες,ψυχολογικες μα και γεωγραφικες προυποθεσεις

Again there is no seperation plan out of it. We have satisfactory command of the Greek language and can easily understand what it says.

Anyway I will not go point by point to confront the interesting things that you say.
The facts that you refer to are misty, the sources are controversial and based on memories, and there has never been any scientific research on this matter. Almost all the refferences are biased.
And history is always written by the winners, and the Communists were the lost party of the civil war, so you can assume what the history will be.

However I think that the time is right to look into this matter with unbiased point of view.

You say that we should read between the lines. I say that we should read exactly the lines, and focus on the facts and not make assumptions.

Also the presentations of fragments of these sources in misleading. one sentence alone gives entirely diffirent impression than a passage, and than a complete study. And you repeatedly present fragments that may mislead. See what happened with Istor, he seperated a sentence and wonders what does in mean. Read the whole paragraph Istor to see what it means.
An Arab saying says: "Those who want, they see white crows".

Also we cannot easily judge the period during the German occupation and the messy situation that followed the withdrawal of the Germans from the Balkans. ALL the leaders of this period were following instructions from abroad. It couldn't be diffirent. It was very easy to lose your head then and the great powers were leading the game.

As regards the things that you say that KKE was following Tito, I repeat that you are the only one to say this, and as you can very well understand... "ή ο γιαλός είναι στραβά, ή στραβά αρμενίζουμε".

So stop chasing witches and trying to find traitors.

If you keep on implying that there were some Greeks that were working against the sovereignity of our country then, I challenge you to provide clear facts, and not "reading between the lines", or your personal assumptions.