• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Люди691
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы1007
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации165
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
      • Показать ещё
Выбор редакции
09 декабря, 19:00

Upcoming Guidance for First Lady Michelle Obama

Monday, December 12th Washington, DC * 11:30AM ET – Continuing a tradition dating back to Bess Truman, First Lady Michelle Obama will visit the Children’s National Health System in Washington, DC.  This year Mrs. Obama will be joined by television and radio host Ryan Seacrest. The Children’s National Health System is home to the Ryan Seacrest Foundation’s Seacrest Studios, a state-of-the-art broadcast media center located in the hospital’s atrium. As part of their visit, Mrs. Obama and Mr. Seacrest will tour the facility and visit with patients and their families. Following the tour, they will visit the hospital’s atrium to read holiday stories to children and participate in a broadcast from Seacrest Studios. 

08 декабря, 16:49

Nu Skin (NUS) Provides Weak 2016 Sales View; CEO to Exit

Nu Skin Enterprises Inc. (NUS) recently updated its financial guidance for 2016, wherein it expects sluggish sales growth and also announced the exit of its Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"). Shares of Nu Skin declined 7.2% yesterday after the news. The company also provided an initial guidance for 2017.

Выбор редакции
07 декабря, 15:33

Nu Skin CEO Truman Hunt to leave company for assignment with Mormon church

This is a Real-time headline. These are breaking news, delivered the minute it happens, delivered ticker-tape style. Visit www.marketwatch.com or the quote page for more information about this breaking news.

06 декабря, 15:41

Текст: Основные проблемы по-прежнему на стороне населения ( Сергей Алексашенко )

Нет у нас одноруких…  Нужно привыкать к новой реальности: ближайшее время мне предстоит вам доказывать, насколько был прав американский президент Гарри Трумэн, который однажды потребовал найти однорукого экономиста ― фраза «с одной стороны, … но с другой…», которая на английском языке звучит как «on the one hand… but on the other…», часто будет у меня встречаться. Потому что никакого очевидного тренда в российской экономике пока не наблюдается, и вся картина мира, которую я буду рисовать, будет выглядеть, как лоскутное одеяло.  Индекс ВЭБа ― оперативная оценка ВВП с устраненными сезонностью и календарным фактором и шестимесячная скользящая ср...

05 декабря, 21:48

George C. Marshall: Statesman, Not a Warrior

Paul R. Pillar U.S. Military, United States Useful perspective on issues surrounding the nomination of the retired Marine Corps general James Mattis to be secretary of defense, including the issue of civilian control of the military, can come from reflecting on the career of the one other general ever to be U.S. defense secretary.  Whether the appointment of Mattis turns out to be good or bad will depend as well on other things, but for comparison and context, consider the role and talents of the third secretary of defense, George C. Marshall. Marshall had a career as an Army officer but, apart from 18 months as a second lieutenant of infantry during the insurgency in the Philippines that followed the Spanish-American War, he rose to five-star general without ever commanding troops in combat.  He instead was a brilliant planner and organizer.  During World War I he was a staff officer who was heavily involved in the planning of operations for the American Expeditionary Force.  As Army chief of staff throughout World War II, Marshall could be said to have managed the enormous allied war effort as much as any one person did.  This was one of two roles that earned him a distinguished place in history. His other big role was as a post-war diplomat, beginning when President Truman dispatched him to China to try to arrange a political settlement between the Chinese Nationalists and Communists.  He served as Truman’s secretary of state during the critical years of the beginning of the Cold War, from 1947 to 1949.  It was during his tenure in that office that he led implementation of the economic recovery program that bears his name—work for which he would receive the Nobel Peace Prize in 1953. Marshall’s service as defense secretary (following a stint as president of the American National Red Cross) thus came after he had already been one of the most prominent members of the Truman administration and a diplomat of world-class stature and accomplishment. Read full article

02 декабря, 05:56

Gillibrand says she won't vote for Mattis waiver

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) on Thursday said she plans to vote against the waiver required for retired Marine Gen. James Mattis to serve as Donald Trump’s defense secretary.Gillibrand’s early opposition to the waiver came less than an hour after Trump announced he would tap Mattis for the Pentagon. The popular commander, nicknamed "Mad Dog," is still expected to become the first defense secretary nominee in more than 60 years to win the congressional waiver that's necessary to install him as the military's civilian leader given his recent service in uniform.“While I deeply respect General Mattis’s service, I will oppose a waiver," Gillibrand said in a statement. "Civilian control of our military is a fundamental principle of American democracy, and I will not vote for an exception to this rule.”The law requiring a waiver for defense secretaries who have recently served in uniform dates back to 1947, and Congress indicated that it did not expect exceptions to the rule after allowing retired Army Gen. George Marshall to lead the Pentagon under President Harry Truman in 1950. Because the waiver is legislative, it could ultimately prove subject to a 60-vote threshold for Senate approval -- meaning that the GOP would have to secure at least eight Democratic votes in the upper chamber.Gillibrand sits on the Armed Services committee, whose chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) hailed Mattis' imminent nomination and vowed to act on his confirmation "as soon as possible in the new Congress.""America will be fortunate to have General Mattis in its service once again," McCain said in a statement Thursday.

25 ноября, 10:34

Почему Обама помиловал индюшку?

АиФ.ru отвечает на популярные вопросы читателей.

24 ноября, 17:18

Известный экономист рассказал о необходимости прогрессивного налогообложения

Главная задача российской власти – восстановление доверия к ней. Для этого нужно начать движение к обществу социальной справедливости или социальной кооперации, считает экономист Никита Кричевский.

22 ноября, 12:49

ХАМАС: "Трамп может быть евреем"

Один из лидеров ХАМАСа в секторе Газа выразил подозрение, что новоизбранный президент США Дональд Трамп втайне еврей

21 ноября, 21:35

Medicare Will Be Gone By Next Thanksgiving, If Republicans Have Their Way

This Thanksgiving, while I give thanks for my Medicare, Speaker Paul Ryan and his Republican Congress are actively plotting to dismantle it. Medicare is government-provided health insurance for those aged 65 and over, as well as for those with disabilities so serious and permanent that they cannot earn enough to support themselves. Those two groups total more than 55 million of us. Poll after poll shows that those of us who are covered by Medicare love it. Other industrialized countries have what amounts to Medicare-For-All. Residents of those countries enjoy health care as a matter of right, from cradle to grave. But not here. And those of us who do have Medicare may not have it for long, if the Republicans just swept into power have their way. President Franklin Roosevelt supported universal, government-provided health insurance -- in essence, Medicare-For-All. He established an interagency working group to develop a universal health insurance proposal as part of his Social Security Act of 1935. In the end, though, he feared that those who saw the world the way today's Republicans do, and hated the idea of government providing health insurance, would use the proposal to bring down the entire Social Security bill. So, he did not push it. President Harry S. Truman also supported the idea. He pushed hard for what would have been Medicare-For-All, but never succeeded Learning from those earlier struggles, the pragmatic President Lyndon Johnson, perhaps the most effective lawmaker of all time, decided to take an incremental approach. His advisers debated whether to start with children, but chose seniors instead. Not only do seniors vote, there was already Social Security, a program designed to provide economic security in old age. Everyone recognized that true economic security did not exist, if retirees were one illness or accident away from bankruptcy. And that concern of bankruptcy was real. Before Medicare, most seniors could not afford health insurance. Those who could, paid three times more than younger people, despite having, on average, half as much income. So LBJ started with Medicare, expecting Medikids to follow shortly. After that, it would be simply a matter of closing the gap in ages. The initial age of eligibility for Medicare could be gradually lowered from age 65. And the age at which children no longer were covered by Medikids could be gradually increased. And voila! Meet in the middle and we have Medicare-For-All. But that is not what happened. Just a few years later, President Richard Nixon did expand Medicare to cover people with disabilities. But President Jimmy Carter, who ran as an outsider to Washington, failed to build on the legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society, so no further progress towards Medicare-For-All was made. President Bill Clinton could have proposed building on Medicare's success, but he didn't. Clinton fought to expand health insurance coverage, but, styling himself a New Dem, implicitly rejected expanding Medicare and instead embraced the Republican ideology of private markets. His proposal mandated that people obtain private health insurance, with the government providing subsidies for those who couldn't afford the costs. Throwing people into the arms of the private health insurance market, no matter how regulated, is at base a Republican idea -- though not one they chose to support. Instead, they united against so-called Hillarycare and helped hand the newly elected President his first major defeat. Complicated to explain and understand, Hillarycare never received the support that expanding Medicare undoubtedly would have. An inferior idea, proposed as a third way, was soundly defeated. The Affordable Care Act embraced the same basic approach as Hillarycare. Like Hillarycare, Obamacare, relies on private markets and competition. Unlike the expansion of Medicare, relying on for-profit health insurers is a flawed, Republican idea. Among its flaws, Obamacare is difficult to explain and understand --and Republican opponents have taken full advantage of that flaw. Republicans have used opposition to Obamacare to win election after election. Having now won control of both Congress and the White House, Republicans have announced their intention to repeal it. But today's Republicans are not just threatening to end Obamacare. Ironically, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan is threatening to convert Medicare into Obamacare. He is plotting to end government-provided health insurance and force those with Medicare to buy insurance on the private market, with only subsidies to offset the cost of what the private sector wants to charge. If the Republicans succeed, I and my fellow Medicare policy holders will be on our own, forced to negotiate on our own with for-profit companies, rather than enjoy the protections of our government. Thanks, but no thanks. Donald Trump ran on a promise NOT to cut Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. Ryan is using two lies to support his radical agenda. First, he claims that "because of Obamacare, Medicare is going broke," when in fact Obamacare strengthened Medicare's financing. Second, as he does with Social Security, Ryan claims his motive is to save, not destroy, Medicare. How ironic! After railing against Obamacare for years, Ryan and his fellow Republicans want to turn Medicare into Obamacare. The Affordable Care Act was better than nothing but far inferior to Medicare. Medicare-For-All is easy to explain, easy to understand, and far superior, in virtually every way, to Obamacare. Despite the fact that Medicare covers those with the greatest health needs -- old people and people with disabilities -- it has lower administrative costs, per capita, than private insurance. We could cover everyone and save money, as a society! Like Social Security, Medicare is an earned benefit. Everyone -- seniors and people with disabilities who are currently covered by Medicare and workers who are earning that coverage with every paycheck -- must mobilize. This is a real threat. And it is coming now. This is classic bait-and-switch. Republicans ran on repealing Obamacare. Now they have their crosshairs aimed directly at Medicare. Donald Trump ran on a promise NOT to cut Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid. No one who won in 2016 (or for that matter, in any prior election in the nation's history) ran on a platform to dismantle Medicare -- but that is what we are likely to get by Thanksgiving of next year. Indeed, Ryan is threatening action perhaps as soon as January. Democrats should propose Medicare-For-All as a substitute for Republican plans to repeal Obamacare and destroy Medicare. And all of us should call our members daily to protest Ryan's proposed gutting of our successful and popular Medicare. I urge everyone -- Trump supporters, Clinton supporters, and everyone else -- to join the fight. The message is simple: Keep your hands off our Medicare! Nancy J. Altman is founding co-director of Social Security Works. Join SSW in telling Donald Trump, Paul Ryan, and Mitch McConnell to keep their hands off the American people's earned Social Security and Medicare benefits. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

18 ноября, 16:49

HUFFPOLLSTER: Donald Trump Has The Lowest Favorability Of Any Recent President-Elect

Views of the new President-elect remain unusually polarized. Most Democrats want to get rid of the Electoral College. And Donald Trump might have gotten more support from rural Hispanic voters than previous Republican nominees did. This is HuffPollster for Friday, November 18, 2016. DONALD TRUMP’S FAVORABILITY RISES, BUT REMAINS LOW - Jeffrey M. Jones: “Donald Trump’s favorable rating has improved from 34% to 42% after his election as president. While a majority in the U.S. still have an unfavorable view of him, his image is the best it has been since March 2011 when 43% viewed him positively….Republicans have shown the greatest increase ― 11 percentage points ― to 82%. Thirty-nine percent of independents, up from 32%, and 10% of Democrats, up from 5%, view Trump positively….The last three presidents-elect had much higher favorable ratings at comparable time periods than Trump currently does. Then President-elect Barack Obama had the highest favorable rating, 68%, in November 2008. Fifty-nine percent of Americans viewed George W. Bush positively just after the Supreme Court effectively decided the 2000 election in his favor in December of that year. Bill Clinton’s favorable ratings were also just shy of 60% after he won the 1992 election. Trump’s ratings lag behind those of other presidents-elect in large part because Democrats’ views of him are much worse than the opposition party’s supporters’ ratings have been in the past. Whereas 10% of Democrats view Trump favorably, 25% of Republicans had a positive opinion of Clinton, 31% of Democrats had a positive opinion of Bush and 35% of Republicans viewed Obama favorably. “ [Gallup] Americans’ satisfaction with the country sinks - Jim Norman: “Americans’ satisfaction with the way things are going in the U.S. plunged 10 percentage points in the aftermath of the presidential election ― retreating from a decade high of 37% in the run-up to last Tuesday’s vote….A sharp decline in satisfaction among Democrats explains most of the drop. Before the election, 62% of Democrats were satisfied; now, 34% are….Satisfaction levels followed a similar pattern after the White House changed parties in 2008. In the days following that election, satisfaction dropped more among Republicans (26% to 19%) than it rose among Democrats (4% to 7%).”  [Gallup] DEMOCRATS ARE READY TO SCRAP THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE - HuffPollster: “Most Democrats want to see the nation switch over to a popular vote system for electing the nation’s leader, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds, with about 4 in 10 also saying that they will refuse to accept Donald Trump as their legitimate president….Democrats now favor a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College, 66 percent to 14 percent, according to the HuffPost/YouGov survey, while Republicans support keeping the current system by 67 percent to 13 percent. Independents are close to evenly split. Partisanship also affects Americans’ confidence in the voting process….Republicans’ confidence in the system now outstrips Democrats’. Forty-six percent of Republicans say they’re “very confident” that their vote was accurately counted, compared to 31 percent of Democrats who say the same. Twenty percent of Democrats, as opposed to just 8 percent of Republicans, are not too confident or not at all confident that their vote was counted accurately.” [HuffPost] EVEN HISPANIC RURAL VOTERS SHIFTED TOWARD TRUMP - Geraldo L. Cadava: “My county-by-county comparison of election results in 2016 and 2012, drawn from data available at CNN.com, Politico.com, PBS.org and other sites, shows that rural white and rural Hispanic voters have a lot in common. Or to put it another way, the election of 2016 revealed an urban/rural divide that was as strong as the white/Hispanic divide…. many rural Southwestern counties with large Hispanic, predominantly Mexican populations, moved in Trump’s direction as well. That wasn’t true in Southwestern states as a whole... Hillary Clinton got strong Hispanic turnout in Sun Belt metropolises like Las Vegas, Phoenix, and San Antonio. But if you look closely at many largely Hispanic rural areas in these states, you find that Trump did better — and Hillary did worse — than did Mitt Romney or Barack Obama…. To be sure, some of these rural Southwestern counties are extremely small compared with the big cities where Hispanic support for Clinton was strong. In small counties, the Hispanic vote adds up to hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands — while in cities, it totals hundreds of thousands. Therefore, rural Hispanics won’t be credited with moving the needle much in one direction or the other. So yes, there was a Hispanic ‘surge’ in big Southwestern cities... But that ignores the vote in rural counties across the country — including those that are largely Hispanic — that led to Trump’s victory.” [WashPost] Women in rural areas also strongly favored Trump - Rich Morin: “In rural parts of America, it wasn’t just white men who flocked to the polls on Election Day to vote for Donald Trump. Rural white women were right there in the voting lines with them…. The gender gap was a key part of the narrative this election season. Overall, 54% of all women voters said they voted for Clinton, while about the same proportion of men supported Trump (53%), the NBC News exit poll found. But among whites, the story was very different – particularly among men and women living in rural areas or small towns. Trump won comfortable majorities of both rural white men and women, according to the exit poll. While Trump held a 10-percentage-point advantage over Clinton among white women nationally (53% to 43%), his victory margin nearly triples to 28 points among rural white women (62% to 34%). Trump led Clinton by 32 points among all white men nationally (63% to 31%), but he beat the Democrat by 48 points among white men living in rural areas (72% to 24%).” [Pew Research] ‘DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN’ DIDN’T DESTROY POLLING  - Lily Rothman, commemorating the 115th birthday of pollster George Gallup: “By 1948, the Gallup Poll organization operated in a dozen countries... And, with a Gallup poll readily available, the American media and public came to expect that elections—and so much else—could be correctly predicted…. Gallup and the rest of the country saw just how complicated it could get. That year’s election produced the most famous—well, perhaps now the second most famous—polling error in American political history: President Harry S. Truman’s victory over Thomas Dewey. Gallup and his fellow pollsters had predicted just the opposite. TIME reported that Gallup, even as he put some blame on the margin of error, sent his interviewers out to talk to the same people they had spoken to before the election, to see where they went wrong. But, much as the U.S. might swear in 1948 that no pollster would ever again be trusted, it was too late for that. ‘The argument over whether public-opinion polls are good or bad for a democracy has become somewhat academic —they are obviously here to stay,’ TIME had noted earlier that year... ‘They can find out what the people, who rule a democracy, think and want.’” [TIME]     Pollsters are working now to find out what happened in 2016 - From the American Association for Public Opinion Research, on Thursday: “AAPOR’s Council met today and it strongly reaffirms its commitment to examine the performance of the polls in the 2016 election through its Ad‐Hoc Committee on 2016 Election Polling. The committee draws together prominent academics, election pollsters as well as authorities on public opinion who are not directly involved in political polling.  Every member of the committee understands that its work must meet the highest standards of objectivity and thoroughness. Individually and as a group, they are committed to achieving those goals. We are confident that the committee’s finished report will be useful, fair, and an important contribution to our understanding of election polling. We explored the possibility of shifting this work to the National Academy of Sciences. But it soon became apparent that this would delay the publication of a report by at least a year, add considerable cost, and likely would tap many of the same experts who are already members of the AAPOR committee.  The Council applauds the work the committee has done to date and looks forward to its final report next year.” HUFFPOLLSTER VIA EMAIL! - You can receive this daily update every weekday morning via email! Just click here, enter your email address, and click “sign up.” That’s all there is to it (and you can unsubscribe anytime). FRIDAY’S ‘OUTLIERS’ - Links to the best of news at the intersection of polling, politics and political data: -David Leonhardt delves into Democrats’ issues with stagnating turnout. [NYT] -Harry Enten argues against the theory of “shy Trump” voters. [538] -David Byler takes a deep dive into the Clinton and Trump coalitions. [RCP] -Aaron Blake looks at the evidence for a strong late shift toward Donald Trump. [WashPost] -Larry J. Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley offer 16 observations about the 2016 elections. [Sabato’s Crystal Ball] -Michael Barthel and Jeffrey Gottfried review Americans’ expectations for interpretation from the news media. [Pew] -Kevin Munger explains how he created bots to fight racism on Twitter [WashPost] -About a quarter of Americans have earned money from the digital “platform economy.” [Pew Internet] -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

18 ноября, 05:36

Remember When George Takei Said He Loves A 'Country That Once Betrayed Me'?

It was chilling enough to learn that President-elect Donald Trump’s team was discussing the idea of a registry for Muslim immigrants. The news grew even more alarming when Carl Higbie, a Trump surrogate, defended the notion by citing the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. Now, people in search of a ray of hope are turning to actor-turned-activist George Takei and his inspiring 2014 TED Talk. Takei’s speech, which he shared on Twitter on Thursday, offers both a sober warning and a stirring call to stand up for American ideals: In his 2014 presentation, Takei spoke of being taken to a prison camp in Arkansas when he was only 5 years old. It was just months after the attack on Pearl Harbor, and it didn’t matter to authorities that he, his mother and his siblings were all born in the U.S. The actor recalled tears streaming down his mother’s face as they were removed from their California home. He remembered the barbed wire at the camp and the guards pointing machine guns at them. He spoke of “grotesquely abnormal” living conditions and being treated like criminals. But despite the unfair treatment, he, his family and more than 100,000 other Japanese-Americans endured. Takei explained why he continues to love a country that once betrayed him by sharing his father’s words. “He told me that our democracy is a people’s democracy, and it can be as great as the people can be, but it is also as fallible as the people are,” Takei recalled his father saying years after their imprisonment. “He told me that American democracy is vitally dependent on good people, who cherish the ideals of our system and actively engage in the process of making our democracy work.” Our democracy is a people’s democracy, and it can be as great as the people can be, but it is also as fallible as people are. George Takei, recalling his father's wise words Takei also spoke of the young Japanese-Americans who volunteered for the military after Pearl Harbor, but were denied the chance and categorized as “enemy non-alien.” “It was outrageous to be called an enemy when you’re volunteering to fight for your country,” Takei said. “They even took the word ‘citizen’ away from us and imprisoned them for a whole year.” That decision was later reversed. The 442nd Regimental Combat Team, an infantry regiment made up almost entirely of Japanese-Americans, would become one of the most highly decorated units in U.S. history. Takei shared what President Harry Truman said to the 442nd after the war: “You fought not only the enemy, but you fought prejudice ― and you have won.” This is dangerous. Have we failed to learn the lessons of the past? I worry for America. https://t.co/1Ol7DeLuDC— George Takei (@GeorgeTakei) November 17, 2016 As Trump, who used anti-Muslim rhetoric during his campaign, appoints white nationalists (see: Steven Bannon) to the White House, it is as important as ever to recognize the value that people of all races and religions bring to the United States. Those young men and women who seven decades ago defended the country that had imprisoned them “are my heroes,” Takei said. “They clung to their belief in the shining ideals of this country,” he said. “And they proved that being an American is not just for some people, that race is not how we define being an American.” Perhaps the president-elect could take a moment to listen to Takei, too. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

15 ноября, 16:55

Доктрина Трампа: «Америка — прежде всего»

Сегодня у Трампа появилась реальная возможность повторить путь Гарри Трумэна, который, став президентом, изменил внешнеполитический курс на целые поколения вперед.

14 ноября, 23:40

A Letter To My Children And Grandchildren

Joseph A. Califano, Jr., who was President Lyndon Johnson's chief assistant for domestic affairs and Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare in the Carter Administration, last night sent this email to his daughter in response to emails about coping with the election that she had received from her children's schools and sent him. Dear Claudia, Please do not accept such emails without realizing that they express the "conventional wisdom" (a phrase Ken Galbraith crafted when I was young) of the elite folks at the big corporations, universities, private schools and national media, living in affluent suburbs and urban enclaves. Their school leaders easily imagine (that's the "in" feeling) that their kids would be shaken by this troublesome, traumatic exercise in democracy and so offer "counseling." These elites just can't accept the relentless pain of parents who must send their kids to (often lousy) public schools, who work two or three jobs to keep their families together, and who think their kids are locked in a caste system with no upward mobility. These parents are hurting because government in Washington has not been working and has let them down for decades. As Churchill said, "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others." To me it's appalling that schools like your children's don't say: "This is democracy. Learn from it. Learn that there are lessons here. Learn that most people don't live like you do. Work to make the world a better place for all, and when you grow up don't vote just for your own good (lower taxes, etc.)." I remember when Harry Truman succeeded Franklin Roosevelt and the elite, including your most conservative grandmother, my mother, said, "Terrible. Awful. He's part of the criminal Prendergast political machine and a haberdasher." But he turned out to be a great president. I remember when John Kennedy was assassinated while I was working in the Pentagon. I went into my boss Army Secretary Cy Vance's office and said, "I'm going back to New York. Lyndon Johnson's a southerner from Texas; he'll be a second rate president," and Vance said, "Stay around." Thank God. I didn't vote for Trump; I didn't like him or his ideas, but we are one nation--like an airplane we have only one pilot. So your schools should have quoted Barack Obama's eloquent statement about our democratic system, instead of writing emails like the ones you sent me. I love you and the children too much to let this pass. Just as you make up your own mind, teach your children to do the same. Love, Dad -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

14 ноября, 12:08

Working with Donald Trump: a guide for European leaders

Toby Melville/Reuters Richard Maher, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies The election of Donald Trump has come as a powerful shock to leaders and citizens across Europe. Across the continent, many Europeans watched his rise first with dismay and then with growing alarm, but gave little prospect to him actually defeating former secretary of state Hillary Clinton. But with Trump now set to enter the Oval Office in January to become America's 45th president, European leaders must start thinking about how they can work with him and his administration for at least the next four, and possibly the next eight, years. This will not be easy for leaders such as French President François Hollande, who said the president-elect "makes you want to retch", or Matteo Renzi, who made no secret of his support for Trump's rival. Of course, how Europe responds depends on the policies Trump pursues once in office. Will he drop the bluster and bravado that marked his campaign, and moderate some of his campaign statements, such as calling the NATO alliance "obsolete", suggesting he might formally recognise Russian sovereignty over Crimea, and calling the British vote in June to exit the European Union "a good thing"? Or will his credo of "America First" and his rejection of "globalism" lead to the steady erosion of America's commitment to global order and stability? European leaders face a difficult, even agonising, decision. Trump is a man many openly scorn and revile. But a functional relationship with the United States - including a United States that is led by Trump - is a matter of necessity rather than choice for Europe. Standing up to Trump European leaders will make clear, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel did in her letter congratulating the president-elect, that future cooperation with the United States will be based on a shared commitment to liberal-democratic values. These include, as Merkel's letter stated: Democracy, freedom, as well as respect for the rule of law and the dignity of each and every person regardless of their origin, skin colour, creed, gender, sexual orientation, or political views. These remain the foundational principles on which the Atlantic Alliance is based, and the erosion of these values would only serve to embolden authoritarian strongmen such as Russian President Vladimir Putin or Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Protesters in Berlin march in opposition to Trump's victory. Axel Schmidt/Reuters European leaders should remind Trump, and the officials he appoints to senior positions, of US obligations to European security. There will be severe and possibly irreparable damage if the United States defaulted on its commitments. Every US president since Harry S Truman has interpreted the NATO Treaty's mutual defence clause as irrevocable, and establishing a clear legal and moral obligation on the United States to come to the aid of an ally under attack. With a newly aggressive and revanchist Russia, this commitment is more important today than at any point since the end of the Cold War. Paying a fair share Trump will not be the first US president to complain that America's NATO allies in Europe are not carrying their fair share of the security burden. Every US president since Eisenhower, in fact, has called on European countries to do more to provide for their own defence. Participants stand at a NATO tactical exercise at the land forces training centre in Oleszno, Poland. Kacper Pempel/Reuters Among NATO's European allies, only Greece, the United Kingdom, Estonia, and Poland currently meet the alliance's target of spending at least 2% of GDP on defence. While they should refuse to submit to any potential White House attempts at blackmail, it is reasonable to expect Europeans to contribute more for their own security. European leaders may be able to mute some of Trump's criticisms of allies free-riding on American largesse by committing to increase defence spending and deployments of equipment and personnel within the context of NATO operations and missions. Europe's leverage Once Trump enters office he will probably come to realise and appreciate how much he needs the cooperation of other countries to achieve his foreign policy goals and objectives. Despite its own troubles - such as the ongoing euro calamity, the refugee crisis, and negotiating Britain's exit from the EU - Europe remains the indispensable partner for the United States on global economic and security issues. In some areas, such as counter-terrorism, intelligence sharing, and maintaining the arms embargo against China, European cooperation remains crucial. This creates leverage for Europe, and the possibility of influencing US attitudes in these domains. European leaders should anticipate transatlantic relations under Trump to be more transactional than they have been under previous administrations. As Jeremy Shapiro of the European Council on Foreign Relations has said, appeals based on "the old formula of solidarity, common interests, and shared values" are not just likely to be ineffective, but are likely to be seen by Trump as "negotiating weakness". Trump will seek the help of European partners when he perceives that doing so is in his interest, but unlike almost all of his predecessors since the end of World War II, he will not reflexively turn to the Atlantic Alliance to address the most important global challenges. Working around the commander-in-chief European leaders must keep in mind that while Trump will have tremendous influence over the future direction of US foreign policy, he will be just one person in a vast national security apparatus. Not everyone in his administration will share his views on NATO's strategic irrelevance, his eagerness to accommodate Russia, or his enthusiasm over Britain's exit from the EU. Top Republican officials condemned his statement that he might not automatically come to the aid of a NATO ally under attack, for example, and by very wide margins the American public continues to see NATO as being good for the United States. Apart from a suspicion of trade agreements and a pledge to put America "first", it does not appear that Trump holds many firm foreign policy convictions. Other members of his administration may be able to shape his thinking so that it aligns more closely with the long-standing, bipartisan foreign policy consensus in the United States, especially when it comes to NATO. Tough road ahead None of the above will be easy for European leaders, and there is no guarantee of success. Trump has given no indication that he understands or appreciates the value of the transatlantic alliance, of the benefits of a strong and united Europe, or the deep and long-standing partnerships the United States has established with individual European countries over many decades. European leaders must decide on which issues they can and must compromise with the Trump administration, such as raising military spending and contributing more to their own defence, and on which issues they must stand firm, such as their unequivocal commitment to liberal-democratic values and to the sanctity of the NATO alliance. The future of the West may depend on it. Richard Maher, Research Fellow, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

12 ноября, 00:00

Hail to the Chief (of Staff)

William McGurn, Wall Street JournalWhen Dwight D. Eisenhower was elected in 1952, Harry Truman opined that his successor would quickly learn that a general has more power than a president.

11 ноября, 01:52

Michelle tries to make Melania feel at home

Just as Laura Bush did for her, Michelle Obama shows Melania Trump the lay of the land.

10 ноября, 19:38

A Short History of Awkward Presidential Transitions

Donald Trump questioned where Barack Obama was born. The president called the man who’s succeeding him “unfit.” But there's ample precedent for their mutual antipathy.

09 ноября, 21:48

The New Defense Odd Couple: Trump and McCain

Dan Goure Security, United States Trump and McCain may well turn out to be the Odd Couple of national politics.  While it is way too early to make predictions regarding president-elect Trump’s national security policy or first defense budget, that hasn’t stopped the talking heads from doing so. The near-hysteria in some quarters over Mr. Trump’s lack of foreign policy experience, the prospect of his finger on the nuclear trigger or some of his remarks on the campaign trail should not allow us to forget that some of the greatest foreign policy and defense Presidents of the past century have been those without the “requisite” experience. Harry Truman, the former failed haberdasher, wasn’t even read-in to the Manhattan Project until after he took office. He created the fundamental structure of the modern global security system. Ronald Reagan rebuilt the U.S. military and won the Cold War.  Not bad for an actor. The next president has made it clear that he intends to do more for the U.S. military and veterans, to put pressure on long-standing allies to do more and spend more on their own security and to lead from the front should U.S. troops engage in conflicts. Most important in the short-term is his belief that sequestration was a stupid law and needs to be repealed. What observers need to consider are the broader potential implications for national security of yesterday’s election.  Republicans held on to the Senate and now control both chambers of Congress as well as the White House. While the president-elect and some members of Congress will need to bind up their campaign wounds and come together, there is a tremendous opportunity for the two branches of government to unite and forge a coherent national security policy and even a defense budget profile that reflects the true demands being placed on the U.S. military. When it comes to addressing national security and rebuilding the U.S. military, one relationship is likely to determine what emerges over the next several years, that between President Trump and Senator John McCain (R-Arizona). Senator McCain easily won re-election. This means he will return as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.  If the new President wants to have a substantive and lasting impact on national security and the state of the military, they will need to work together. Read full article

09 ноября, 20:54

AT LAST, THE 1948 SHOW: “It’s like 1948 all over again for American media,” Media Myth Alert a…

AT LAST, THE 1948 SHOW: “It’s like 1948 all over again for American media,” Media Myth Alert author W. Joseph Campbell writes today: It looks something like 1948 for mainstream American news media today. Donald Trump’s stunning victory in yesterday’s presidential election brought reminders of the embarrassment of 1948, when Thomas Dewey, the presumptive favorite […]

19 июля 2015, 10:34

Немецкие скрепы для Америки

Оригинал взят у mysea в Немецкие скрепы для АмерикиВ первом ряду Вернер фон Браун и ученые, работавшие над созданием ракетКто все эти люди? А это немецкие ученые, особенно талантливые и незаменимые. Война кончилась, и Америка получила свои трофеи: "редкие умы", лучших ученых Германии. Они были собраны в Форт Блисс. Операция Скрепка" проводилась Объединённым агентством по целям разведки ( JIOA) В приказе Трумэна о начале операции "Скрепка" особо подчёркивалось, что исключена вербовка тех, кто «был членом нацистской партии и был более чем формальным участником её деятельности или активно поддерживал нацистский милитаризм». Согласно указанным ограничениям, большинство намеченных JIOA учёных должны были быть признаны негодными для вербовки, среди них ракетостроители Вернер фон Браун, Артур Рудольф и физик Губертус Штругхольд, каждый из которых был ранее классифицирован как «угроза безопасности силам союзников».Вернер фон Браун среди товарищейЧтобы обойти приказ президента Трумэна, а также Потсдамское и Ялтинское соглашения, JIOA разрабатывало фальшивые профессиональные и политические биографии для учёных. JIOA также изъяло из личных дел учёных членство в нацистской партии и вовлечённость в действия режима. «Отбелив» от нацизма, правительство США признало учёных благонадёжными для работы в США. Кодовое название проекта «Скрепка» появилось от скрепок, использованных для того, чтобы прикрепить новые политические личности «американских правительственных учёных» к их личным документам в JIOAВдобавок к ракетчикам и ядерщикам, союзники искали химиков, физиков и разработчиков морского вооружения. В 1947 году эта операция эвакуации охватила около 1800 техников и учёных, а также 3700 членов их семей.Фотография из файлов "Операция "Скрепка".

18 июля 2015, 16:02

Потсдамская конференция - 70 лет. (62 ФОТО)

Оригинал взят у aloban75 в Потсдамская конференция - 70 лет. (62 ФОТО)70 лет назад открылась Потсдамская конференция (Берлинская конференция)  - последняя из встреч лидеров стран антигитлеровской коалиции — СССР, США и Великобритании, проходившая с 17 июля по 2 августа 1945 года с целью определить дальнейшие шаги по послевоенному устройству Европы. Советскую делегацию возглавлял И. В. Сталин, американскую - Г. Трумэн, английскую - У.Черчилль, а с 28 июля сменивший его на посту премьер-министра К. Эттли.Этому событию я и  посвящаю данную фотоподборку.(Фотоальбом "Ялтинская конференция" можно посмотреть здесь)***Огромная благодарность товарищу yip03 за видеролик, котрый он сделал на основе моей фотоподборки.1. Встреча "Большой тройки". К. Эттли, Г. Трумэн, И. В. Сталин.2. Премьер-министр Великобритании У.Черчилль и его дочь Оливер, прибывшие на Берлинскую конференцию спускаются по трапу самолета.3. Премьер-министр Великобритании У.Черчилль проходит по аэродрому в день прибытия на Берлинскую конференцию.4. Президент США Г.С.Трумэн и генерал Д.Эйзенхауэр проходят по аэродрому в день прибытия на Берлинскую конференцию.5. Советская регулировщица на дороге в Потсдам, где проходила конференция глав трех держав.6. Контрольно-пропускной пункт союзников на дороге в Потсдам, где проходила конференция глав трех великих держав.7. Прибытие И.В. Сталина в резиденцию советской делегации в Бабельсберге.8. Комната приемов в резиденции И.В. Сталина в Бабельсберге.9. Комната отдыха в резиденции И.В. Сталина в Бабельсберге.10. Рабочий кабинет в резиденции советской делегации в Бабельсберге.11. Вид дворца Цецилиенхоф, в котором проходила Берлинская конференция.12. Вид дворца Цецилиенхоф, в котором проходила Берлинская конференция.13. Дворец Цецилиенхоф — место проведения Потсдамской конференции.14. Дворец Цецилиенгоф, в котором проходила Берлинская (Потсдамская) конференция.15. Проезд военных советников и представителей Объединенного штаба союзников (слева направо): первый ряд – Дж. Маршалл, А. Брук, маршал авиации Ч. Портал, генерал Г. Исмей; второй ряд – адмирал Э. Кинг (США), адмирал Э. Канингхэм (Великобритания).16. Проезд делегации США: госсекретарь Д. Бирнс, адмирал У. Леги и другие.17. Официальная фотография глав правительств трех держав: У. Черчилль, Г. Трумэн и И.В. Сталин.18. Перед началом Берлинской (Потсдамской) конференции 1945 г. У.Черчилль, Г.Трумэн и И.В.Сталин.19. Нарком иностранных дел СССР В.М.Молотов , В.Н.Павлов , посол СССР в США А.А.Громыко, Госсекретарь США Д.Ф. Бирнс (слева направо) и др. за круглым столом на заседании министров иностранных дел в дни работы Берлинской конференции.20. Министр иностранных дел Великобритании Э.Бевин (2-й слева) , Ф.Т.Гусев , первый заместитель наркома иностранных дел СССР А.Я.Вышинский, Нарком иностранных дел СССР В.М.Молотов В.Н.Павлов и др. за круглым столом на заседании министров иностранных дел в дни работы Берлинской конференции.21. На одном из первых заседаний Берлинской (Потсдамской) конференции. Присутствуют: И.В. Сталин, В.М. Молотов, А.Я. Вышинский, У. Черчилль, Г. Трумэн и другие.22. Общий вид зала заседания министров иностранных дел во время Берлинской конференции. Среди присутствующих: А.Я.Вышинский, В.М.Молотов, А.А.Громыко, А.Иден, Ф.Т.Гусев и др.23. Одно из заседаний во время Берлинской конференции. Среди присутствующих: Э.Бевин, А.Я.Вышинский, В.М.Молотов, И.В.Сталин, А.А.Громыко (слева направо), Ф.Я.Фалалеев, Н.Г.Кузнецов (2-й ряд справа) и др.24. Главнокомандующий группой советских войск в Германии и главноначальствующий СВАГ Г.К.Жуков в дни Берлинской конференции.25. Главнокомандующий группой советских войск в Германии и главноначальствующий СВАГ Г.К.Жуков, Нарком ВМФ СССР Н.Г.Кузнецов на заседании представителей Советской Армии и Флота – членов делегации СССР на Берлинской конференции.26. Генерал-лейтенант Н.В.Славин , Начальник штаба ВВС Советской Армии Ф.Я.Фалалеев, Главнокомандующий группой советских войск в Германии и главноначальствующий СВАГ Г.К.Жуков , Нарком ВМФ СССР Н.Г.Кузнецов , начальник Главного Военно-морского штаба СССР С.Г.Кучеров , начальник Генштаба Вооруженных сил СССР А.И.Антонов (слева направо) на заседании представителей Советской Армии и Флота членов делегации СССР на Берлинской конференции.27. Начальник Главного Военно-морского штаба СССР С.Г.Кучеров, генерал-лейтенант Н.В.Славин, Главнокомандующий группой советских войск в Германии и главноначальствующий СВАГ Г.К.Жуков, Нарком ВМФ СССР Н.Г.Кузнецов, начальник Генштаба Вооруженных Сил СССР А.И.Антонов , Начальник штаба ВВС Советской Армии Ф.Я.Фалалеев и др. в парке дворца Цецилиенхоф в дни Берлинской конференции.28. Встреча военных советников трех держав. В центре - начальник Генерального штаба РККА генерал А.И.Антонов, справа от него - нарком ВМФ адмирал Н.Г.Кузнецов, начальник Главного штаба ВМФ адмирал С.Г.Кучеров; слева от Антонова - начальник Главного штаба ВВС маршал авиации Ф.Я.Фалалеев и другие.29. Сталин И.В., Трумен Г., Черчилль У. в кулуарах зала заседания Потсдамской конференции.30. Министр иностранных дел Великобритании А.Иден в гостях у Наркома иностранных дел СССР В.М.Молотов в дни работы Берлинской конференции.31. Глава Советского правительства И.В.Сталин, В.Н.Павлов, Президент США Г.Трумэн, посол СССР в США А.А.Громыко (слева направо) у виллы Трумэна в дни Берлинской конференции.32. Министр иностранных дел Великобритании Э.Бевин (3-й слева) в гостях у Наркома иностранных дел СССР В.М.Молотова в дни Берлинской конференции. Среди присутствующих: А.Я.Вышинский, Ф.Т.Гусев, К.Эттли.33. Госсекретарь США Д.Ф.Бирнс (3-й слева), Президент США Г.Трумен (в центре), глава Советского правительства И.В.Сталин , Нарком иностранных дел В.М.Молотов, посол СССР в США А.А.Громыко и др. на балконе виллы Трумэна в дни Берлинской конференции.34. В гостях на вилле Г. Трумэна в Бабельсберге. Госсекретарь США Д. Бирнс, президент США Г. Трумэн, глава правительства СССР И.В. Сталин и нарком иностранных дел В.М. Молотов.35. Фотокорреспонденты СССР, США и Великобритании - участники фотосъемки Берлинской конференции.36. Премьер-министр Великобритании К. Эттли, Президент США Г.Трумэн, глава Советского правительства И.В.Сталин (сидят слева направо), адмирал В.Логи, Министр иностранных дел Великобритании Э.Бевин, Гос. секретарь США Д.Ф.Бирнс, Нарком иностранных дел СССР В.М.Молотов (стоят слева направо) в парке в дни работы Берлинской конференции.37. Группа экспертов-советников делегаций СССР, США и Великобритании у дворца Цецилиенхоф.38. Первый заместитель наркома иностранных дел СССР А.Я. Вышинский, Ф.Т.Гусев, министр иностранных дел Великобритании А.Иден, Нарком иностранных дел СССР В.М.Молотов, В.Н.Павлов, А. Керр (слева направо) в дни Берлинской конференции.39. Президент США Г.С.Трумэн, глава Советского правительства И.В.Сталин в группе участников Берлинской конференции. Среди присутствующих: В Логи, В.Н.Павлов.40. Берлинская (Потсдамская) конференция 1945 г. И.В. Сталин, Г. Трумэн, А.А. Громыко, Д. Бирнс и В.М. Молотов.41. Премьер-министр Великобритании У.Черчилль, Президент США Г.Трумэн, глава Советского правительства И.В.Сталин (слева направо) в парке в дни работы Берлинской конференции.42. Главы правительств трех держав: К.Эттли, Г.Трумэн и И.В.Сталин. Стоят: адмирал У.Леги, Э.Бевин, Д.Бирнс и В.М.Молотов.43. И.В. Сталин, Г. Трумэн, Д. Бернс и В.М. Молотов у крыльца резиденции президента США на Потсдамской конференции. На фото справа налево в первом ряду: Маршал Советского Союза, Председатель СНК СССР и Председатель ГКО СССР Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин, президент США Гарри Трумэн (Harry S. Truman), государственный секретарь США (Secretary of state) Джеймс Бернс (James F. Byrnes, 1882—1972) и Нарком иностранных дел СССР Вячеслав Михайлович Молотов (1890—1986) у крыльца резиденции президента США на Потсдамской конференции. На фото во втором ряду справа между И.В. Сталиным и Г. Трумэном — американский адмирал Уильям Лихи (William Leahy), в центре между Г. Трумэном и Д. Бернсом — американский переводчик Чарльз Боулен (Charles Eustis «Chip» Bohlen, 1904–1974).44. Высшие офицеры СССР и США на встрече начальников Генеральных штабов во время Потсдамской конференции. Советские высшие офицеры (в белой форме слева направо): Начальник Генерального Штаба РККА — генерал армии Алексей Иннокентьевич Антонов, маршал авиации РККА Фёдор Яковлеви Фалалеев. Американские офицеры (сидят справа налево): генерал-лейтенант Генри Арнольд, начальник штаба армии США генерал Джордж Маршалл, начальник штаба морских операций адмирал Эрнст Кинг.45. Служащие и паровоз 7-й колонны НКПС (Народного комиссариата путей сообщения), доставившей советскую делегацию на Потсдамскую конференцию. Второй слева в нижнем ряду — кочегар паровоза латыш Янис Рудольфович Иршейнс.46. Вид на дворец Цецилинхоф (Cecilienhof) незадолго до открытия Потсдамской конференции.47. Делегации «Большой тройки» за столом переговоров на Потсдамской конференции.48. И.В. Сталин, Г. Трумэн и К. Эттли на Потсдамской конференции. На фото на переднем плане справа налево: председатель СНК СССР и председатель ГКО СССР, маршал Советского Союза Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин, президент США Гарри Трумэн (Harry S. Truman) и премьер-министр Великобритании Клемент Эттли (Clement R. Attlee). На заднем плане справа - Нарком иностранных дел СССР Вячеслав Михайлович Молотов.49. Британский премьер-министр У. Черчилль обходит строй почетного караула союзных войск на берлинском аэродроме Гатов.50. Американские транспортные самолеты С-54 «Скаймастер» (Douglas C-54 Skymaster) на берлинском аэродроме Гатов во время Потсдамской конференции.51. Маршал Польши Михал Роля-Жимерский у дворца Цецилинхоф во время Потсдамской конференции.52. Советская делегация во время перерыва в заседании на Потсдамской конференции. В центре — маршал Советского Союза, Председатель СНК СССР и председатель ГКО СССР Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин, слева от него (в полосатом костюме) - Нарком иностранных дел СССР Вячеслав Михайлович Молотов.53. Британские дипломаты, посол Великобритании в СССР Арчибальд Кларк-Керр (Archibald Clark-Kerr, в центре) и заместитель министра иностранных дел Великобритании Александр Кадоган (Alexander Cadogan, справа) в дворце Цецилинхоф (Cecilienhof) на Потсдамской конференции.54. Советские дипломаты, первый заместитель Наркома Иностранных дел СССР Андрей Януарьевич Вышинский (1883—1954, справа) и Посол СССР в США Андрей Андреевич Громыко (1909—1989, в центре) беседуют с государственным секретарем США (Secretary of state) Джеймсом Бернсом (James F. Byrnes, 1882—1972) на аэродроме во время Потсдамской конференции.55. Британские фельдмаршалы Гарольд Александр (Harold Alexander, слева) и Генри Уилсон (Henry Wilson, справа) на прогулке с военным министром Великобритании Генри Симпсоном (Henry Simpson, в центре) во время Потсдамской конференции.56. Высшие офицеры СССР и США на встрече начальников Генеральных штабов во время Потсдамской конференции. Советские высшие офицеры (в белой форме слева направо): Начальник Генерального Штаба РККА — генерал армии Алексей Иннокентьевич Антонов, маршал авиации РККА Фёдор Яковлевич Фалалеев. Американские офицеры (сидят справа налево): генерал-лейтенант Генри Арнольд, начальник штаба армии США генерал Джордж Маршалл, начальник штаба морских операций адмирал Эрнст Кинг.57. Советские офицеры смотрят на выходящего из дверей премьер-министра Великобритании Уинстона Черчилля во время Потсдамской конференции.58. Маршал Советского Союза, Председатель СНК СССР и Председатель ГКО СССР Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин на прогулке во дворце Цецилинхоф с президентом США Г. Трумэном во время Потсдамской конференции.59. Председатель СНК СССР и председатель ГКО СССР Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин, президент США Гарри Трумэн (Harry S. Truman) и премьер-министр Великобритании Уинстон Черчилль (Winston Churchill) после ужина, данного Уинстоном Черчиллем.60. Председатель СНК СССР и председатель ГКО СССР Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин, президент США Гарри Трумэн (Harry S. Truman) и премьер-министр Великобритании Уинстон Черчилль (Winston Churchill) после ужина, данного Уинстоном Черчиллем.61. Маршал Советского Союза, председатель СНК СССР и председатель ГКО СССР Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин, президент США Гарри Трумэн и премьер-министр Великобритании Уинстон Черчилль в перерыве между заседаниями на потсдамской конференеции.62. Лидеры «Большой тройки» антигитлеровской коалиции на Потсдамской конференции:  премьер-министр Великобритании (с 28 июля) Клемент Эттли (Clement R. Attlee), президент США Гарри Трумэн (Harry S. Truman), председатель СНК СССР и председатель ГКО СССР Иосиф Виссарионович Сталин.Фотоальбом составлен на основе материалов сайтов:"Военный альбом" http://waralbum.ru/"Победа. 1941–1945" http://victory.rusarchives.ru/Все фото кликабельны.Все мои фотоальбомы здесь