# Honoring The Sacrifices Of The Soviet Union in WWII….Really?



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.


1.An interesting and significant month, August.

*August 20–25, 1944*
Allied troops reach Paris. On August 25, Free French forces, supported by Allied troops, enter the French capital. By September, the Allies reach the German border; by December, virtually all of France, most of Belgium, and part of the southern Netherlands are liberated. World War II: Timeline.

Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.

a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war

b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.

_ Really???_

*There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, *and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.

First: *most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces*. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.



*3. *"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"
Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin

And.....

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but *only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans.* Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army.                                                                                                                       "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

And.....

"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."





						Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century
					

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century




					www.moreorless.net.au
				






Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:

"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?"                “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383



So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.

Oh…wait….they did!

Love is blind.


----------



## Correll (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> ...
> 
> *There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, *and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.
> 
> ...




well, this is completely true, and a major and even possibly the primary factor, 

it is worth noting that having the war in your country, as opposed to on the other side of an ocean, is going to increase civilian deaths. (America is blessed)

a better, fairer, comparison might be, comparing soviet losses to french or polish losses. 


on the other hand, it is also worth  noting that the soviet union did start wwii as an ally of hitler and only switched sides when hitler betrayed them, not because the soviets had any problem with anything he was doing.


----------



## konradv (Aug 17, 2020)

Correll said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...


To see where the honor belongs you have to separate the party and the people.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Correll said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...




"it is worth noting that having the war in your country, as opposed to on the other side of an ocean, is going to increase civilian deaths."


You know, I'm sure, that war, and where it was taking place, is hardly pertinent when discussing the Marxist, Bolshevik, Leftist effect on populations of their own nations.

Death, slaughter, oppression is the coin of the realm under all Leftist forms....


None of the totalitarian forms of political plague have the slightest concern for human life: not communism (gulags), not Nazism (concentration camps), not Liberalism (abortion), not Progressivism (eugenics), not socialism (theft), not fascism (murder).

They only differ in the final outcome: slavery, serfdom, or death.

They all follow Trotsky: "We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

konradv said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...





See post #4.

Take notes on it.


----------



## bluzman61 (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


Fantastic post, PC.  Thank you.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


/——/ I learned a lot from your post. Thanks


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Cellblock2429 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...





Thanks very much. I appreciate that a great deal!


----------



## konradv (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


Doesn't effect my post at all.  Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery?  Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".


----------



## Correll (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...





well that is all true, collateral damage is a real thing. the nazis never bombed any us civilian targets. (well, very few)


this link here, shows deaths as a percentage of the population, a fairer comparison, and if you look at france, which was invaded twice and fought over quite a bit, and bombed a lot, so a fairer comparison with collateral damage, 









						World War II casualties - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				





france lost  1.4% of it's population.

the soviets, with only part of it's territory invaded and occupied, lost 13.7%.


wow.  I knew you had a point, but that is a lot more of a dramatic difference than even i was expecting.


----------



## rylah (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...



Most of what You write is well researched and I like reading it,
but this is just a bunch disgraceful rubbish.

Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!

It's beyond disrespectful to present the cause of their death like that,
no better than the vulgar leftist one-sided propaganda.


----------



## konradv (Aug 17, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...


It was a tough time for people on the Eastern Front.  Communists?  Nazis?  What a choice!


----------



## Correll (Aug 17, 2020)

konradv said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




it is worth noting, that the oppressed peasants of the soviet union, had no way of knowing of, or at least not much, about the holocaust.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...




You should re-read this, from the OP:

World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but *only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans.* Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. *When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. *More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.


They marched into German guns, or turned and were shot by Soviet tanks behind them.....who were aimed at THEM!

Bravery, I suppose would have been to revolt against the savages like Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin.



I don't understand what you mean by this, or what it has to do with the issue under discussion?

"Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".

Did you read '1984'? 
In the prescient novel, "1984," George Orwell's sort-of hero, Winston Smith, has the job "to* overwrite the truth, to replace the history of what happened with a revised version.* Winston enjoys his work and is good at it, yet at the same time he worries about the rewriting of history, and wants to know 'what really happened'."
Winston Smith s role in 1984 is that of the Democrat media today.


----------



## konradv (Aug 17, 2020)

Correll said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


Though some locals did take part in Nazi pogroms and some joined the SS.  Like I said, tough choices.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

konradv said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




Thank heaven for Ronald Reagan, huh?


If you haven't read it....worth a read:


----------



## rylah (Aug 17, 2020)

konradv said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



How can we judge not being in their shoes...G-d forbid.

And yes, many of those "Nazi collaborators" were simple folk caught and escaped,
only to be shot at sight, or worked to death as traitors by default.

It takes more than a brain to understand Russia,
as much as its geographical width is their width of heart, despite all that was during war.


----------



## bluzman61 (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Another fine post, PC.  Thank you.


----------



## konradv (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


You're not separating the people from the party.  SU citizenship was a political fact of life that doesn't negate personal heroism.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

4. The Russian people know what savages their Bolshevik leaders were:

Russians would do anything not to return to Roosevelt's pal's 'paradise.'

The 850,000 strong army of Gen. Andrei Andreyevich Vlasov, having *gone to the other side, Germany, "to save their country from Stalin" *and having later surrendered to US forces, "formed the core of those forcebly repatritated between 1944 and 1947."
"Operation Keelhaul; The Story of Forced Repatriation from 1944 to the Present.by Julius Epstein p.27, 53.



Gen. Deniken, former commanding general of the White Russian armies which were supported by the USA in 1917-1920, explained that* none of these men served in the Nazi army out of love for Germany..."they hated the Germans" he wrote....rather, they knew what awaited them in the 'Soviet paradise.'



More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal"byNikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.*

How badly did these individuals not want to go to Stalin's USSR?

From the NYTimes, January 20, 1946:
"Ten renegade Russian soldiers, in a frenzy of terror over their impending repatriation to the homeland, committed suicide today during a riot in the Dachau prison camp...."


Those Russians who hated the communists understood more than do Democrat voters in America.
With their control of the schools and the media, many Americans don’t realize what the Democrat Party is, what it has become. And may not until it is too late.


----------



## DGS49 (Aug 17, 2020)

Thank you for this post, PC.  It is a good and valuable reminder of why Ronaldus Maximum rightly named the Soviet Union an "Evil Empire."

I have often pondered why simple Soviet citizens would have fought to defend the regime that victimized them, not recognizing the incredibly lethal  pressures placed on them by their Communist overlords.

And as you imply today's school children will never even see a hint of their incredible inhumanity.

Pity.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...




"citizenship"??????


They were prisoners.


----------



## Sunni Man (Aug 17, 2020)

rylah said:


> Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
> but the Russians, common Soviet folk fought HEROICALLY!


I am also a big fan of PoliticalChik's posts, but she is way off base on this topic. ...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

DGS49 said:


> Thank you for this post, PC.  It is a good and valuable reminder of why Ronaldus Maximum rightly named the Soviet Union an "Evil Empire."
> 
> I have often pondered why simple Soviet citizens would have fought to defend the regime that victimized them, not recognizing the incredibly lethal  pressures placed on them by their Communist overlords.
> 
> ...




Thank you.

I see much the same in America today, where our children are taught to hate our nation.


…Victor Kravchenko, one of the first and most influential Soviet defectors to the United States, who had written "I Chose Freedom," a searing account of life under Stalin. You can read his book on line.
Kravcheko revealed that the Communists did in reality what Winston Smith did in the novel 1984. 
"_Shamelessly, without so much as an explanation, it revised half a century of Russian history. I don't mean simply that it falsified some facts or gave a new interpretation of events. I mean that it deliberately stood history on its head, expunging events and inventing facts. It twisted the recent past--a past still fresh in millions of memories--into new and bizarre shapes, to conform with the version of affairs presented by the blood-purge trials and the accompanying propaganda... The roles of leading historical figures were perverted or altogether erased.... More than that, living witnesses, as far as possible, were removed. The directing staff of the Institute of Marx, Engels and Lenin in Moscow, repository of ideological truth, were removed and the more important people among them imprisoned or shot. 

 The new history" became possible. *To brand the shame more deeply on our minds, "study" of the new version was made obligatory for all responsible *Party people. History classes met nearly every night in this period and lecturers from Sverdlovsk came to our town to help hammer home the lies, while most of us fumed inwardly. Whatever human dignity remained in our character was humiliated.. But even the most gigantic lie, by dint of infinite repetition, takes root; Stalin knew this before Hitler discovered it. As I looked on I could see terrible falsehoods, at first accepted under pressure, become established as unquestioned "facts," particularly among younger people without personal experience to the contrary to bother them."_



			Text collection
		




The same is true of our media.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Sunni Man said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
> ...




Prove it.


And its 'chic.'


----------



## rylah (Aug 17, 2020)

Sunni Man said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
> ...



Glad we can agree on something complicated.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


Ha ha ha - you stupid twisted imbecile.

You just can't resist it can you? Taking the well documented historical record WWll and twisting,restructuring, airbrushing and wholly misrepresenting it. All because your extreme right wing views, fondness of the Nazi's and hatred of communism you feel compels you.

_"1.An interesting and significant month, August."_

Isn't it!  You then outline the allied achievements in liberating North Western Europe even including the Free French, de Gaulle and a few officers who basically flew from London to Paris backed by the allies. Wow!

You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Geography-

_" Did you see any mention of Soviet troops there?" _

Ha ha.......NO, Did you expect me to?

Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border.

The only possible way they could have been in France, Holland etc, is if they had already occupied Germany in which case the war would be over.

I am quite shocked by your ignorance!

Need to be somewhere now, but don't run away as I haven't even started your thrashing and have much to add.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded,



The Soviets bore most of the burden fighting the Nazis. While we waited two and a half years to finally launch D Day, the Soviets had already been fighting three years.

The Soviets destroyed most of the German Army and inflicted most of the casualties. The Battles of Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk all exceeded our D Day and Battle of the Bulge.


----------



## Correll (Aug 17, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded,
> ...




what do you think of a nation that only turned on their allies the nazis, when the nazis invaded their country?


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 17, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Not my problem.

I am only commenting on the role the Soviets played in defeating the Nazis.  They bore most of the burden and won most of the war

While we invaded Normandy, most of the German Army was dedicated to fighting the Soviets


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 17, 2020)

Militarily, the Soviets fought on the ground for four years, pushing the Wehrmacht steadily back more than 2,200 kilometers, stride after stride, a herculean effort in which not one Western soldier took part. In one showdown, summer ’43’s Battle of Kursk, two million Soviet and German troops clashed alongside 6,000 tanks and 4,000 aircraft. In terms of personnel, it was more than four times D-Day’s collision.









						Who defeated the Nazis?
					

75 years on, it is time for the West to realize Russia's key role in Germany's surrender, and for Russia to admit the Soviets' wartime crimes.




					www.jpost.com


----------



## Sunni Man (Aug 17, 2020)

Years before the war, Stalin had executed most of the Russian military leadership. So when Germany invaded, the Soviet army was poorly led, using outdated weapons, and quickly became a disorganized rabble of retreating and surrendering soldiers.
All that Stalin could do early in the war was keep throwing men at the German lines. In a desperate attempt to halt the German army's advance.
Eventually, the German army start to wear down as more and more Russians were sent to the front as cannon fodder. Then the brutal Russian winter set in, and the German advance grind to a halt.
This gave Stalin time to train a new officer core, and supply his army with the weapons America began shipping to the Soviets.
By 1943 the German offensive had stalled on the outskirts of Stalingrad and the largest tank battle the world had ever seen took place at Kursk.
After that battle, the tide of the war changed, and the now efficient Soviet war machine would fight its way to Berlin and obliterate the remains of the Third Reich.  ...  








						Battle of Kursk - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Sunni Man (Aug 17, 2020)

It's been estimated that 90% of all the German soldiers killed in combat during WWll were killed on the Russian front.  ...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...





Everything is linked, sourced and documented.


----------



## iamwhatiseem (Aug 17, 2020)

konradv said:


> Doesn't effect my post at all.  Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery?  Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".


* READ:*_  "I am going to ignore everything you wrote/linked, because I don't like it... and say this anyway"_


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Sunni Man said:


> Years before the war, Stalin had executed most of the Russian military leadership. So when Germany invaded, the Soviet army was poorly led, using outdated weapons, and quickly became a disorganized rabble of retreating and surrendering soldiers.
> All that Stalin could do early in the war was keep throwing men at the German lines. In a desperate attempt to halt the German army's advance.
> Eventually, the German army start to wear down as more and more Russians were sent to the front as cannon fodder. Then the brutal Russian winter set in, and the German advance grind to a halt.
> This gave Stalin time to train a new officer core, and supply his army with the weapons America began shipping to the Soviets.
> ...




"All that Stalin could do early in the war was keep throwing men at the German lines. "

1. Both Hitler and Stalin took their view from Karl Marx.

2. Stalin supported Hitler at the League of NationsHe

3. Stalin provided the resources for Hitler's Blitzkrieg.

4. ....until June 21, 1941

5. Hitler never expected to defeat Stalin's three greatest generals....December, January and February. He had three months worth of resources, which is why he attacked in June.

6."....realistically middle sized *Germany could not defeat the much larger Ussr *in the long term. Germany would have eventually surrendered to the western allies to prevent total occupation by the USSR ..."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence (comment)

7. "All that Stalin could do early in the war was keep throwing men at the German lines. "
Proving my point.
The Soviet people deserve no honor or gratitude: they were forces, at bayonet point, to advance.
And Stalin fought for none of America's values.....FDR's lies notwithstanding.

September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was* freedom of religion in the USSR.*"The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in *a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."*
"Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," by Dennis J. Dunn, p. 137


They fought at the point of a gun, and their leaders fought for world domination.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Sunni Man said:


> It's been estimated that 90% of all the German soldiers killed in combat during WWll were killed on the Russian front.  ...




What does that have to do with whether the Soviets deserve any credit or gratitude?


Here's the lesson you haven't learned yet"


*1. What could, should have happened? 
When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941, *America should have done nothing...*no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance! Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into! 

"Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile, *leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.


2. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, William Bullitt (Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936.) *warned Roosevelt about what would happen if he continued pursuing the policies of appeasement toward Stalin*that formed the foundation of the American war strategy. He pleaded with FDR not to 'permit our war to prevent Nazi domination of Europe to be turned into a war to establish Soviet domination of Europe.'

He predicted the Soviet annexation of half of Europe; *George Kennan identified that letter as the earliest warning of what would be the result of FDR's policies.*
"For the President Personal & Secret: Correspondence Between Franklin D. Roosevelt and William C. Bullitt," Orville H. Bullitt, p. 575-590


3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever that *it would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'*
Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"*


----------



## konradv (Aug 17, 2020)

iamwhatiseem said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't effect my post at all.  Don't the people of Russia/SU deserve credit for their bravery?  Being Soviet citizens is a historical fact that can't be changed barring a "memory hole".
> ...


No, I was saying that regardless of what you think of the party, the people were heroic.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

5*. Now…..the value of those millions of Russians slaughtered?*

And the result of those millions of loses?

Wasted lives.



The Soviet Union didn’t liberate anybody, nor try to leave intact democracies with great capitalist systems, as the United States did once Roosevelt was replaced by the American, Truman, who aided France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, and the rest of Western Europe.

Instead, Eastern Europe, bequeathed to the tender mercies of Stalin by Franklin Roosevelt, had to wait for Republican President Ronald Reagan for their freedom from under communism’s boot.



And, of course, Japan, to which we gifted democracy, free market capitalism, and self-determination…and not wholesale liquidation of dissidents. Compare that to this, the 'honored' Soviet Union:

“The *Katyn massacre*[a] was a series of mass executions of nearly 22,000 Polish military officers and intelligentsia carried out by the Soviet Union, specifically the NKVD ("People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs", the Soviet secret police) in April and May 1940…. 8,000 were officers imprisoned during the 1939 Soviet invasion of Poland, another 6,000 were police officers, and the remaining 8,000 were Polish intelligentsia the Soviets deemed to be "intelligence agents, gendarmes, landowners, saboteurs, factory owners, lawyers, officials, and priests" Katyn massacre - Wikipedia



*Stalin murdered* those who represented not only the flower of the Polish military but of Polish society as well. Stalin’s minions had executed them all, in one of the worst single episodes of mass execution in the blood-soaked 20th Century, in order to destroy any Polish capacity for resisting a Russian occupation. And Franklin Roosevelt covered it up, and had Stalin’s propaganda broadcast.


Yet the neo-Marxists who control the Democrat Party, the media and the schools......demand gratitude and honor for their blood drenched predecessors.


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 17, 2020)

The Soviets took the brunt of the blitzkrieg and won they deserve credit where credit is due, not due to Marxism and all that other bullshit you idiots keep spewing but because they won through determination and resisted during onslaught. Their techniques of tactics improved, their fierce fighting capabilities, their industrious nature all combine to gain the victory fighting the Nazis. To deny them their glory would be the same as to deny the glory of the victory of all the allies.


----------



## Moonglow (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> 5*. Now…..the value of those millions of Russians slaughtered?*
> 
> And the result of those millions of loses?
> 
> ...


You wouldn't know a damn thing about being a soldier you have never been one. You are a blight upon the soldier because instead of honor all you have is disrespect. All soldiers respect their enemies because not to do so means arrogance and death. I do not feel sorry for your ignorance nor do I apply any of your words to wisdom because you have none.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


/——-/ Although the translation is crude, this article outlined the way Stalin tried to steal US aircraft technology. Another footnote in history. Why in the USSR copied the American “flying fortress” B-29 | The Global Domain News


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Cellblock2429 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...




Of course Stalin had far less trouble with the plan and material to build an Atomic Bomb, thanks to FDR....


1. US Army Maj. George Racey Jordan was a Lend-Lease 'expediter' who couldn't understand the volume or priority nature of the shipments to the USSR....including 'secret cargo' hidden under 'diplomatic immunity.'

a. "The President has directed that 'airplanes be delivered in accordance with protocol schedules by the most expeditious means.' To implement these directives, the modification, equipment and movement of Russian planes have been given first priority, even over planes for US Army Air Forces." From the diaries of Maj. George Racey Jordan, supervisory 'expediter' of Soviet Lend-Lease aid, p. 20.

2. A simple businessman, in his 40's, who had flown with Eddie Rickenbacker in WWI, Jordan loved his country more than the Establishment, and became what ex-Socialist Max Eastman called the 'moral aristocracy.' West, "American Betrayal," p.119.

3. In his capacity, he worked closely with Soviet chief, Col. Anatole Kotikov. With them at their apartment, he noticed Kotikov's wife-secretary pull her husband's "Experimental Chemicals" dossier from "a hiding place under the mattress, while her husband was pulling on his handsome boots of black leather." Jordan, "From Major Jordan's Diaries, " p.47

a. In the file was a list of everything necessary to produce a 'brand-new and experimental atomic pile, courtesy of Lend-Lease." Diana West, "American Betrayal,"

b. 
c. "... he was instructed by the White House and State Department to deliver parts for the atomic bomb to the Soviets – at the same time the nation was worried about Russia stealing A-bomb secrets. At first, Congress did not believe him, but his diary filled with dates, shipping manifestos, and names of pilots who flew the missions,..." Major George Jordan

4. In Jordan's book is a near-complete list of Soviet Lend-Lease material

a. According to Jordan, shipments to the USSR via Lend-Lease continued until 1949. *Victory in Europe Day*—known as *V-E Day* or *VE Day*—was the public holiday celebrated on 8 May 1945 (in Commonwealth countries, 7 May 1945) to mark the date when the World War II Allies formally accepted the unconditional surrender of the armed forces of Nazi Germany


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

6. Did government school teach that* both Hitler’s and Stalin’s views originated with Karl Marx*, and that Stalin provided the natural resources Hitler lacked for his Blitzkrieg? They were allies until June 21, 1941.



*"The Soviet Story,*" an award winning documentary clarifying the close and personal attachments of Hitler's Nazis and Stalin's Communists.

"Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems." 
Telling the Soviet story



Here’s the film:




The film opens showing the method used to kill millions of civilians...hands tied behind their backs, an expertly aimed shot to the back of the head, the fall into a mass grave. Not the Nazis....Stalin's Soviets....and this went on for years, well before FDR embraced the USSR.



By every metric the blood drenched Bolshevik regime was worse than Hitler’s Hell…yet this is the entity with which FDR chose to bond America. And we are suffering with the results to this day.


----------



## alang1216 (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


The tremendous hardships and loses of the Russian people in WWII should have all our sympathy and compassion.  Did the Russian people choose Stalin?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

alang1216 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...




"Did the Russian people choose Stalin?"

"choose"???????


I can save you a great deal of time, if you pay attention: you need not establish your idiocy each and every day.

Folks have read your posts, and, and will remember their first appraisal.


----------



## Correll (Aug 17, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




if your goal is to glorify the commies, which it seems to be your goal, then examining the context of their fighting, is your problem.


the actions of the soviet union were a big part of the whole set up and start of wwii. 

who knows, if hitler could not have been reassured by stalin, that his eastern front was secure, thanks to his alliance with the soviets, he might never have been able to pull the trigger and start wwii. 

that might have prevented the holocaust.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Yes but then you twist and airbrush to suit your far right political agenda.

_" *There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded,"

" First: most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces."*

"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin" -
A Soviet weekly newspaper today published the most detailed accounting of Stalin's victims yet presented to a mass audience here, indicating that about 20 million died in labor camps, forced collectivization, famine and executions.
The estimates, by the historian Roy Medvedev, were printed in the weekly tabloid Argumenti i Fakti, which has a circulation of more than 20 million.
*The estimated number of deaths is about equal to the number of Soviet soldiers and civilians believed killed in World War II.*_

You conflagrate, by taking two similar but completely different issues (20 million deaths) and switching them. The 20 million deaths on the battlefield at the hands of the Nazi's is what is remembered each year. Not the pre war 20 million from the purges, labor camps etc.
Further the war dead and those who fought is what is commemorated  not Stalin or the communist regime.

Stalin allowed Zhukov free reign to do as he liked including retreat which he did several times during the Stalingrad & Kurst campaigns, unlike Hitler who refused his Generals including Von Paulus which cost them Stalingrad, the 8th Army , 750,000 troops and thus the War.

Any Army will shoot their own troops if they take it on themselves to not engage with the enemy without permission. The British & French shot hundreds during WWl many just found shell shocked and wandering in no mans land. Didn't matter they were sacrificed as a warning to others.

You make no mention of the 2 million+ Jews that where murdered by shooting by the Nazi's.
Nor the several million of soviet troops that were over run in the opening months of Barbarossa & starved to death  

The Nazi's also refused to recognize any rights of Soviet POW's and the very first gassing's with Zyklon B were inflicted on Soviet POW's at Auschwitz 1942.

So there's a brief history of why the 20 million soviets and those who survived are honored by all nations every year.

I sense you possibly know as much about WWll as you do geography.


----------



## alang1216 (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> alang1216 said:
> 
> 
> > The tremendous hardships and loses of the Russian people in WWII should have all our sympathy and compassion.  Did the Russian people choose Stalin?
> ...


I take it you can't even answer a softball question.  Maybe history is a topic you should avoid until you have at least a rudimentary understanding of it.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...




1. Any supporter of the party of Death, the Democrat Party will justify, or simply shrug, at the wholesale murder of their own citizens by the Bolsheviks.
That would be you, huh?


2. The French Revolution, the father of the Russian Revolution, was the first to use terror as government policy.
"The present moment favors us....With the help of all those starving people who are starting to eat each other, who are dying by the millions, and whose bodies litter the roadside all over the country, it is now and only now, that we can-and therefore must- confiscate all church property with all the ruthless energy we can muster....Our only hope is the despair engendered in the masses by the famine, which will cause them to look at us in a favorable light or at the very least, with indifference." 
Lenin, March 19, 1922

...and another...

 "Hang at least 100 hostages, execute the kulaks, do it in such a way that people for hundreds of miles around will see and tremble." 
Lenin 

3. Jews???? The Bolsheviks taught the Nazis to build concentration camps....
"The Soviet NKVD trained the SS, taught them how to build concentration camps, as they had been operating for 20 years before the origin of the Nazis." Viktor Suvorov, former Soviet Military Intelligence Officer. "

Many Jews fled to the USSR....where Stalin rounded them up, and delivered them to the Gestapo as a gesture of friendship

4. The Soviet Premier Molotov warned the West not to fight Nazi ideology. And in his address to the Supreme Soviet in the Kremlin, Molotov declared that fighting Nazi ideology was actually a crime.....because the two ideologies and methods were the same.


5. So....how does it feel being an apologist for these sorts of savages?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

7. America was the most generous and magnanimous victor ever on the planet, while Roosevelt’s chosen dance partner, Russia, continues to be the despotic bully it has been since its great revolution.

“Between 1974 and 1980, while the United States wallowed in post-Vietnam angst, 10 countries had fallen into the Soviet orbit: South Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, South Yemen, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Grenada and Afghanistan. Never had the Soviets lost an inch of real estate to the West. The Brezhnev Doctrine stated simply that once a country went Communist, it would stay Communist. In other words, the Soviet empire would continue to advance and gain territory…” http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id382.htm



*Every iteration that owes its birth to Leftism is centered on death rather than life.*

None of the totalitarian forms of political plague have the slightest concern for human life: not communism (gulags), not Nazism (concentration camps), not Liberalism (abortion), not Progressivism (eugenics), not socialism (theft), not fascism (murder).

They only differ in the final outcome: slavery, serfdom, or death.

They all follow Trotsky: "We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."



Whether personal beliefs, or what we call 'politics,' or perhaps 'religion,' the real idea that determines what we will do in any and every situation, is one simple idea. Either one believes that human lives are sacred, or one believes that they can be exchanged to achieve some secular material goal.

Choose a. or b.
a. From Schindler's List: “Whoever saves one life saves the world entire.”
or
b. Trotsky: "We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."



The Soviet Union deserves no honor for its behavior during or after WWII.
Apologists, those duped by the neo-Marxist press and schools, seem unwilling or unable, recognize the clear and evident difference between the nation, Russia, and people who behaved as most would when their lives are threatened.

And the American Left uses that conflation to advance Marx's dictum.


----------



## Juicey Omelette (Aug 17, 2020)

Any glorification of Marxism, or Communism needs to stop for the future sake of our country. 

We have been seeing first hand the effects Marxism/Communism has on our younger BLM/Antifa loving youths.. Especially since it has been propagated and supported so thoroughly by the Democrat party.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Juicey Omelette said:


> Any glorification of Marxism, or Communism needs to stop for the future sake of our country.
> 
> We have been seeing first hand the effects Marxism/Communism has on our younger BLM/Antifa loving youths.. Especially since it has been propagated and supported so thoroughly by the Democrat party.




I just don't see it happening.

The own and operate the schools, the media, the entertainment industry.


I believe it's over for America and for Western Civilization.

Hope I'm wrong.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

8. Perhaps few have the time to read extensively, *so here is a way to connect the past with the explanation for the times we are living through. “Mr. Jones is a 2019 Polish-Ukrainian-British film* that's been kicking around European film festivals for the past year but is getting its first real exposure this month on Amazon Prime.”
The Media's Role in Concealing Stalin's Evils Exposed in Mr. Jones

I just viewed the film….and it is dynamite!!! It tells you everything about Stalin’s genocides in the Soviet Union, about the Left's full court press to influence the world, and makes clear the* questions you should have asked in school.

*

The eponymously named film, *“Mr. Jones,”* tells the story of journalist Gareth Jones, and “… resurrects two little-remembered tales of the 1930s. One is *Stalin's deliberate infliction of a famine on the peasants of the Ukraine that killed between four million and seven million of them. *The other is how *Western journalists, particularly those of The New York Times, deliberately covered up the mass murder.”*
Reason, Op. Cit.



Begin by viewing this film, “Mr. Jones".....on Netflix


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Aug 17, 2020)

For those not wanting to sort through the usual quote mining and equivocation:

These 20 million lives don't have any value, because they were Marxists. Just trust her on this one.

The 3 million+ soviets killed while POWs? Same. Probably got captured on purpose, out of collectivism.

The citizens of Poland, the baltic states, Ukraine, and Belaru, liberated from nazi rules? Would have been better off under the honorable leadership of the fine, white, nonmarxist nazis.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> For those not wanting to sort through the usual quote mining and equivocation:
> 
> These 20 million lives don't have any value, because they were Marxists. Just trust her on this one.
> 
> ...




Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented, while you, on the other hand are our best source of greenhouse gases.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented,


But it's your opinions that are hot garbage. Of course, since you are too cowardly to state them outright, it has to be done for you.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 17, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented,
> ...



Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented, while you, on the other hand are our best source of greenhouse gases. 


I REALLY need a higher caliber of opposition.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Aug 17, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Your cherry picked facts are just your cowardly way of relating your preference for nazis over marxists. Everyone knows this.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Aug 18, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...


She unravels very quickly when challenged. her weekly creationism rants are USMB gold.


----------



## Jantje_Smit (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> I REALLY need a higher caliber of opposition.



What you really need is a good psychiatrist... allthough it's probably much too late for that and a nice padded cell is the only option left...


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


you don't know shit about WW2
..the West Front was minuscule compared to the Ost Front
..so now you are pissing on brave men's graves
..that's some of the dumbest shit I've ever read....


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

..you can say same the same thing about Churchill/Roosevelt/Allied Generals/etc
Rapido River
Market Garden
Battle of the Bulge
Hurtgen Forest
Anzio-Rangers
etc etc
ALL mismanaged battles --idiotic strategies/etc-so the Allied generals/leaders killed their own men
..like I said, you don't know shit about WW2
...more to come


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Aug 18, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


/—-/ Yet you refute nothing PC posts.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> *What could, should have happened?
> When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941, *America should have done nothing...*no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...*



Once again, our resident Nazi Political Chic advocates we should have let the Nazis win.


----------



## Tommy Tainant (Aug 18, 2020)

Cellblock2429 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...


Well I dont really have to. She gets shot down every time.. I guess she passes for intelligent on the right but this thread is distasteful. Russians were fighting nazis while Americans were playing golf.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> *Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...*we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile, *leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war.*



Here, Nazi sympathizer PC advocates it is better to have a German occupied Europe than a Communist Russia.

Imagine a world where Germany controls France, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Denmark and the Fascists in Italy are still in charge.

That is the world Political Chic dreams about


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


PC attacks FDR for holding off an allied invasion till June 1944 while the Soviets fought alone in 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and half of 1944.  They did the fighting and dying against the Nazis.

FDR gave up 200,00 American lives in Europe while Stalin gave up 20 million and PC says we got a bad deal.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


It is not a glorification of Communism but an acknowledgement that our Soviet allies did most of the fighting and dying to defeat the Nazis. 
Hitler outplayed Stalin with a fake alliance when it suited him. Stalin paid by almost losing his country.

The fact is, if Hitler and beaten the Soviets, we would never have regained Western Europe.  The US would not have sacrificed the million lives it would take to liberate Western Europe.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




the world paid, by having to fight wwii, and the holocaust. stalin having a hard job for a few years, was not much payment for his sins.


and we would have liberated all of europe. come 1945, we would have nuked the shit out of germany and that would have been that.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...


/——/ Without you, who else would stick up for Uncle Joe Stalin who murdered millions of his own people? Some people just can’t take a joke.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Aug 18, 2020)

Tommy Tainant said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...


/——/ Americans were building weapons and shipping them off to Britain. Plenty of Americans died as the Nazi Uboats sank the supply ship almost as fast as we could launch them. We also sent volunteers to help the RAF, and many died.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...



Nuclear war is your answer?

Killing tens of millions of people is preferable to Eastern Europe living under communism for 45 years?


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Cellblock2429 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Tommy Tainant said:
> ...



It is a case of choose your poison. Hitler or Stalin?

You and Political Chic obviously prefer a world under Hitler


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



the nuking of Japan killed at most 260,000.  

in the scale of wwii, a similar nuking of Germany would have been completely acceptable to any reasonable person. 


and yes, that would be far preferable to eastern europe not living under communism for 45 years, not to mention avoiding the terrible cost of the Cold War.


how many people do you think the fucking russian army killed as they rolled over eastern europe? 

the way you give anyone not an American a pass for everything, while holding America to account for everything, 


shows that you are an anti-America pos.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

Sunni Man said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Yes the Russians were shooting their own not to retreat,
> ...


Sunni man, Ha ha you are such a hypocrtical and slippery fish.
So your a big fan of 'political chic' - could it have anything to do with the fact that she is an anti- Semite?
I See your still including that Holocaust denial vid in every post.
Wonder with her Christian creationist credentials she accepts Allah and the Islamic faith?
Wonder if she agrees with you about the Holocaust?

No point wondering I'd better ask her!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...




Another lie from the Left.

Amazing how many lies you could get into one post.

I've been to the Holy Land, and like to consider myself a zionist.

And...no, I don't accept 'Allah' as being the same as God.

And I've never claimed to be a Christian creationist...never stated my religion, either.


Anything else?


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> in the scale of wwii, a similar nuking of Germany would have been completely acceptable to any reasonable person.
> and yes, that would be far preferable to eastern europe not living under communism for 45 years, not to mention avoiding the terrible cost of the Cold War.



I can’t believe what a callous killer you are.  You would rather nuke millions of people rather than have them live under communism for 45 years.

Hirohito saw the devastation of the bomb and quickly agreed to surrender.  What makes you think Hitler would do the same?

Hitler already made it clear he was willing to fight to the last man to save his Nazi regime.  He allowed the Soviets and US to slaughter German citizens even though it was obvious he had lost the war.  

What makes you think a nuclear attack would have changed his mind?


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> 5*. Now…..the value of those millions of Russians slaughtered?*
> 
> And the result of those millions of loses?
> 
> ...


A bit off topic but I'm fascinated to know.

'Political chic', Where does Allah and the Islamic faith fit into your view of the universe- serious question?

And are you also a Holocaust denier like Sunni Man?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > 5*. Now…..the value of those millions of Russians slaughtered?*
> ...




You're admitting your post was filled with the sort of lies you Leftists are infamous for?

Excellent.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > in the scale of wwii, a similar nuking of Germany would have been completely acceptable to any reasonable person.
> ...




change his mind or vaporize it, either way, the war would have ended, and western europe and eastern europe would have been liberated, like you said could not happen without stalin. 

so, you're wrong.


your whining about the deaths is stupid, as the death toll in stopping the nazis would be, quite likely less, in that scenario, and certainly not more.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




General Patton knew what the Bolsheviks were, and voiced his opinion loudly......that's why Stalin's BFF, Roosevelt, had him benched.


Patton saw the inevitability of a conflict with the Russians.

"It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon. *The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world,* and Patton knows it. "They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84


Can you imagine the chagrin in the Soviet-occupied Roosevelt administration???



The Red Army is relentless in its quest to control as much of Europe as possible, with *Stalin taking full advantage of Dwight Eisenhower's timidity.*The Russians are seizing more land, and more people are coming under their occupation.



Patton is incensed. "You cannot lay down with a diseased jackal," he recently insisted to a group of journalists.*"Neither can we ever do business with the Russians."


When Undersecretary of War Robert Patterson visited the Third Army, Patton openly lobbied for at least 30 percent of all American troops to remain in Europe, "Keeping our forces intact. Let's keep our boots polished, bayonets sharpened, and present a picture of force and strength to these people.

This is the only language they understand and respect. If you fail to do this, then I would like to say to you that we have had a victory over the Germans but have lost the war."




Even Patton's nemesis, British field marshal Montgomery, agrees: when accepting the surrender of German soldiers, he ordered his troops to stack the Wehrmacht rifles in such a way that they could easily be redistributed should the Germans and British need to defend themselves against a Russian advance." 




Yet the Harvard-educated undersecretary Patterson thinks Patton is delusional. He advises Eisenhower, army chief of staff Gen. George C. Marshall, and President Harry Truman continue to view the Russians benevolently.



In time, of course, Patton's predictions will come true, and the world will have to live with the consequences of American gullibility
"Killing Patton," O'Reilly and Dugard, p. 259-260


Of course, Marshall, Hopkins, et al openly wanted the Soviets to control Europe....and said so.*


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...





PoliticalChic said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Your previous post leaves me even more confused!
So your Jewish?
It wouldn't matter a fig normally but for your strange 'lovefest' with Sunni Man.

You recently posted a thread gleefully enthusing about a potential US Ambassador who was noted as having particularly erroneous anti-Semitic views and statements. You even mused on whether Sunni Man (Holocaust deny'er) would vote for him? And you said he'd be perfect, for of all places Germany.

Do you deny the Holocaust?


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




we americans tend to short term thinking. we were facing the nazis and we were happy to have the russians fighting them too.


but the cost, ,was very, very high.  half of europe and a new war, starting immediately after.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...









The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.

Brave?  No, not really.  They were going to be shot either way.  They just hoped the death by the Germans would be quicker.

Were there Soviet soldiers who were brave?  Absolutely.  But to declare that everyone was brave is a lie.  A lie based on propaganda.


----------



## 22lcidw (Aug 18, 2020)

We are a very fortunate people. We complain about most everything there can be with people making great money and comfortable lives off of it. No matter how you slice it...dead is dead. And people in the Soviet Union died.  Would we Americans have that strength today?


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


I really can’t believe you.  

Scorched earth is your solution to everything.  You take “Better Dead than Red” to a new level

You would rather kill people than to allow them to live in communism.  

Why don’t you ask them?


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.



Do you have a valid historical link to verify that?
Sounds like propaganda


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...



We made a choice.

We were willing to sacrifice Eastern Europe to save Western Europe


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




it is interesting that you can't distinguish between nuking nazi germany and nuking poland or the ukraine.


or, are you just talking shit, like the troll you are?


my point stands. you said we could not win with out stalin. 


obviously we could. we had nukes in 1945. that ends wwii, no matter what is going on is russia.


that you could not admit to being wrong and now want to change the subject to how bad of a person I am, 


is just you being a liberal. ie an asshole.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




i agree. that is the choice we made. we sacrificed eastern europe to secure soviet help against the nazis.

it saved american lives, in the short term, at the cost of the cold war, later.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...









Ummmm, because communism kills waaaaay the fuck more people than any other political system.

That's why.  Far better to never let it get a foothold in this country.  I am more than willing to fight against the commies trying to destroy this republic.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > The Soviets would round up a village, march them at gunpoint to a battlefield, and make them run at german machinegun nests to run them out of bullets.
> ...








Yes, there are multiple sources for it.  Both Russian and German.  I suggest you crack open a book.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...








No, we didn't make that choice.  You also have to ask yourself, why didn't the Western powers declare war on the USSR when they helped Germany conquer Poland?


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



If that is the case......Show me

Telling others to prove your point for you  is usually an indication you don’t have a point.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


The Germans voted Hitler into power. The Japanese folk of Hiroshima, Nagasaki never had a say in their governments war. Yet what ever is said the allies would have never 'nuked' Berlin.
One of the reasons (there were many) racism! They are too much like us. Jabs on the other hand na not remotely.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...



Show where post war USSR killed the tens of millions that nuclear war would have killed


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








The reports are in these things called books.  You should read one.  Or, use your tiny little head to try and figure out how the Soviets managed to lose more people than the entire rest of the world combined.

The Germans simply didn't have, and frankly NEVER had the supplies to come even close to killing that many people. 

Simple logistics tells us that.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








Not true.  There are multiple reports of the targeting for the bombs.  Germany just collapsed faster than expected.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


I am not advocating nuking anyone.....that is you

I am saying the post WWII deal was the best we could have gotten.  A deal that resulted in the USSR folding anyway


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




funny, that wacism never stopped us from bombing the shit out of them in real life. we hit them with everything we had. night and day.


thousand bomber raids. on cites. and we would not use nukes, on them because suddenly we would start thinking of them as our "white brothers" because, ....


yeah, no, that would not happen.

soviets fall, come 1946 berlin is a glowing parking lot.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








I don't have to.  The reports they issued tell us that.  Did the Soviets bleed the Germans?  Yup.  Did we need the Soviets to bleed them?  Nope.  It's nice that they did, but it wasn't necessary.   You also forget that it was the industrial might of the USA that kept them in the fight.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




i did not say that you advocated that. i pointed out that you can't tell the difference between nazi germany and occupied poland. 


the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...





Not "your," you moron...."you're" or "you are"


I just wrote I've never stated my religion.

Perhaps I'm a Druid.....I like trees, and I look good in blue....



So you figured out I oppose anti-Semitism?
No wonder they all you Einstein.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




Not to mention the resultant neo-Marxism that infects our society and major party.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> Did we need the Soviets to bleed them? Nope. It's nice that they did, but it wasn't necessary



More RW revisionist history

The Soviets did 90 percent of the fighting and dying.  We would not have conquered Western Europe without the Soviets tying up most of the German Armies and resources.

We fought against second tier troops and defeated them mostly because they lacked the fuel to maneuver effectively. Germany allocated most of their Divisions to fighting the Soviets. 
Allowing us to invade France and the west with comparatively minimal losses.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


_*".......Soviets managed to lose more people than the entire rest of the world combined".*_

Don't be silly your figures are way out, just off the top of my head I know the soviets lost in the region of 22 million, the entire war cost over 50 million.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




Exactly correct!


And it began here:

. George Earle was a special emissary of FDR's to Europe...and returned in 1944 with proof that implicated the Soviets in the Katyn Forest massacre (In April of 1943, the mass graves of thousands of shot, bayoneted, and asphyxiated Polish officers were uncovered in the Katyn pine forest near Smolensk, Russia.) Earle testified later at the Katyn Forest hearings that Joe Levy of the NYTimes, warned him that bringing an anti-Soviet report to FDR would be a career ender : "George, you don't know what you are going to over there. Harry Hopkins has completed domination over the President and the whole atmosphere over there is 'pink.'" West, "American Betrayal," p.211.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.



How was it a crap deal when FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying for four years?

We saved Western Europe with minimal casualties. The Soviets got Eastern Europe in return for tens of millions of casualties.


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



So you go to the other pathetic extreme to excuse this kind of disrespect...
This is just rubbish for the arrogant who have no memory of war on their soil.

They fought BRAVELY AS A NATION, no need to split hairs, have some basic man's honor.

Where does this need to overcompensate so extremely come from?


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Did we need the Soviets to bleed them? Nope. It's nice that they did, but it wasn't necessary
> ...




of course, without the alliance between nazi germany and stalinist russia, hitler might not have felt able to invade poland, setting off wwii.

if we are judging the soviets actions in wwii let's look at the whole picture.

you do want to be accurate right? or is your goal to glorify communism?


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > the deal we got was a crap deal. fdr deserves no credit for it. he should never had run for that fourth term.
> ...




fdr had nothing to do with that. that was all hitler. he invaded stalinist russia and forced them to fight. 

until that, stalin was happy to have peace and trade and hugs with nazi germany.


yes, we saved western europe with minimal casualties. and set up the next big conflict as we did it.


short term thinking.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




They didn't help us in any way.

The used American troops to support their aims, and FDR went along with their every command.



BTW.....there is ample evidence that *Stalin caused the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.*


. In 1995,Kremlin agent Vitaly Pavlov revealed *"Operation Snow,"the plan to manipulate Japan and America into war.*

a. In "Sacred Secrets: How Soviet Intelligence Operations Changed American History," Leona Schecter and Jerrold Schecter make a very strong case for* Pearl Harbor being the most complex and successful KGB operation,designed to avert a Japanese attack on the USSR, and to force the United States to fight a two-front war, and be unable to stop Stalin from control of* *at least half of Europe.* In 1995, former Kremlin agent Vitaly Pavlov revealed his role in this *"Operation Snow."*


b. Pavlov "was sent to the United States seven months before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor to meet with *Harry Dexter White,* then director of Monetary Research for the Treasury.

*Did "Snow" mean "White"? Yes,

Harry Dexter White had been a Soviet "asset" *since the early 1930s, providing information to Whittaker Chambers, a courier for the communist underground. By 1941 White was *a top aide and adviser to Henry Morgenthau, Jr*., Secretary of the Treasury.

Pavlov wrote that the Soviets feared a Japanese attack from the east, and his mission was to discuss with White what could be done to keep the Japanese from joining forces with the Germans."
Sacred Secrets: How Soviet Intelligence Operations Changed American History
[Operation Snow http://nation.time.com/2012/12/07/pearl-harbor-2-0/]



c. "The chapter on Pearl Harbor is likewise instructive as to how Soviet agents operated.

Japan seriously considered an attack on Russia, but *Stalin’s agents in the Japanese government and in the highly efficient Sorge spy ring *on the island nation helped persuade Imperial Japan to turn its aggression “elsewhere.” That *“elsewhere” eventually turned out to be Pearl Harbor.*

Stalin’s acolytes in the U.S. were simultaneously pushing a foreign policy against Japan that would lead the Japanese away from any designs on Siberia and toward conflict with America."
Infiltration, intrigue and Communists - Conservative News


Connect those dots!
Stalin had spies in every important nation.
In America they controlled Roosevelt,and the nation's foreign policy.

Evidence indicates that he did the same in Japan....
...and the result was the attack on Pearl Harbor.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...




You don't think that that one knows the truth?????


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Did we need the Soviets to bleed them? Nope. It's nice that they did, but it wasn't necessary
> ...









Panzer Lehr, 12th SS, 9th SS and 10thSS were far from 2nd tier troops.  Michael Wittman, the most successful tank commander in the world, was certainly not a 2nd tier soldier.

The problem you have dumbwinger, is all you know is Howard zinn revisionist bullshit while there are people here who have studied it seriously, for years.

Like me.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...




the "other extreme" would be to claim that none of them were brave. 

westhall is being quite nuanced. and honest. 

the need for this, comes from having to prevent people like rw, from glorifying communism, which is just as bad as nazism.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


Yes we'd wage conventional war on them, London was lit up like the suns surface by them and so limited retaliation fine, but nuclear weapons on Europeans? Na a step far too far.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





They didn't 'lose' 22 million, you moron.....they killed 20 million of their own.


2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



_ Really???_



*There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, *and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: *most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces*. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







*3. *"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but *only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans.* Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army.  "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."






						Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century
					

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century




					www.moreorless.net.au
				










Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...




2. Government school propaganda provides two beliefs about the Soviets in WWII.



a. That they deserve gratitude and honor for their valiant efforts and great loses in the war



b. U.S. war propaganda had painted pipesmoking "Uncle Joe Stalin" as a friendly fellow, and the liberal propaganda left people to thinking of Communist Party members as lovable idealists.



_ Really???_



*There is no honor or credit due to the Soviet Union because they lost 20 million in the war. The glorification of the role that the Soviets played in WWII is unfounded, *and almost entirely due to the neo-Marxist influence in our society due to Democrats/Liberals/Progressives doing public relations for them, as they share the same values and aims.



First: *most of the Soviet loses were their troops killed by Stalin’s own forces*. One reason they lost 20 million, while we lost 415,000 was due to the value that America placed on human life, and the lack of same interest by Bolsheviks: they don’t care about human life, a characteristic absorbed and propounded by the current Democrat Party.







*3. *"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but *only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans.* Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army.  "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."






						Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century
					

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century




					www.moreorless.net.au
				










Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...




lol!!! thousand bomber raids is limited retaliation?!


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


Stalin BEGGED FDR to open a second front starting in 1942. Instead, FDR held off invasion till June 1944. In that time, Stalin killed millions of German troops and sacrificed tens of millions of his own people.

Good deal for FDR, bad deal for Stalin.

What “next big conflict” are you talking about?


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


See you've totally ignored my question on Holocaust denial? Fine.

Don't make sense a Zionist denying the Holocaust but I'll put you down as a first I've come across, but then to be fair, not a lot you do say makes much sense.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...








Common parade of German Wehrmacht and Soviet Red Army on September 23, 1939 in Brest, Eastern Poland at the end of the Poland Campaign. In the center is Major General Heinz Guderian; and on the right is Brigadier General Semyon Krivoshein.








						Declarations of war during World War II - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


Yea it ain't nukes!


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Gen Guderian was a better tank commander and wrote the book on Blitzkreig.

Ten times the number of Divisions face the Soviets than faced the West.  
The Divisions facing the west were thin and lacked critical supplies that went to the East


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








The Germans lost 4.3 million.  The Japanese lost 3.1 million, the Italians lost 457,000, the British lost 450,000  The USA lost 418,000,  Yugoslavia 1,000,000,  the USSR lost 27,000,000 on the high estimate, 24,000,000 on the low side.

No one really knows how many China lost.  No one kept track, so they are the outlier.  But the Soviet Union outstrips all belligerents in losses.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...





FDR was fine with Hitler taking other countries. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

*Munich Agreement*, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia. After his success in absorbing Austria into Germany proper in March 1938, Adolf Hitler looked covetously at Czechoslovakia, Munich Agreement | Definition, Summary, & Significance







At the Munich conference where Europe sold out Czechoslovakia, even though France had a treaty to go to war to preserve Czechoslovakia…..Chamberlain was about to appease Hitler….and FDR sent this message to Chamberlain:



*MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference*








						MUNICH MESSAGE FROM U.S. BARED; Roosevelt Sent Encouraging 'Good Man' to Chamberlain Day Before Conference (Published 1955)
					

Documents on US foreign relations in '38, pub by State Dept, include P Gilbert rept on Anschluss, noting strong Austrian support for move




					mobile.nytimes.com
				





"Munich." The lesson of appeasement—that giving in to aggression just invites more aggression—has calcified into dogma. Neville Chamberlain's name has become code for a weak-kneed, caviling politician, just as Winston Churchill has become the beau ideal of indomitable leadership.

When Chamberlain first announced, after returning from signing his deal with Hitler at Munich in 1938, that "peace is at hand," FDR sent Chamberlain a telegram: "Good man," it said. "I am not a bit upset over the final result," FDR wrote the U.S. ambassador to Italy. When Hitler began to chew up the rest of Europe in 1939, FDR temporized and maneuvered to build political support for intervention among his decidedly isolationist countrymen. Indeed, the United States did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor." Presidents and the Mythology of Munich


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...







Arguably worse, but the reality is they are both the same type of government.   Fascism just allows a little bit of personal property while the commies didn't.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




You can put down whatever you want to.....You've been exposed as a liar and a fool.

Get lost.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> *Munich Agreement*, (September 30, 1938), settlement reached by Germany, Great Britain, France, and Italy that permitted German annexation of the Sudetenland in western Czechoslovakia.



Nice try

But as much as you want to blame FDR, he didn’t sign the Munich Agreement


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...








No, they didn't.   There were individual soldiers who were fantastically brave.  But most were simply victims of a government that looked at them as a commodity to be used up.

They drowned them in vodka and then sent them out on the offensive.  Over and over and over.

They weren't brave, they were drunk


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...









Completely unsupported by fact.  Bomber Harris would have completely and utterly destroyed Germany had he been given the opportunity. 

He was systematically destroying German cities one at a time whether they had military value, or not.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...









Oh?  You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy.  1942 and 1943 respectively. 

Might want to take a history class there sport.

Or did you lie intentionally?


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



You see the world in black and white.

I'm not a product of Your American school systems.

You should AT LEAST get out there and try communicate with Russian veterans.

But unfortunately too late, 
arrogance will prevail.

That's why in spite bringing the USSR down, 
the Soviet ideology won in America.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?


no. that is not something to get credit for. that is bare minimal to not be given serious demerits.


fdr's poor handling of the war, set up the Cold War. d'uh.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...



it is enough death and destruction to reveal your wacist claim as utter nonsense.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...








The fire bombing of Tokyo killed more than Hiroshima.   Dead is dead you fool.  The only question is how much does it cost US. 

Dropping a nuke is one plane at risk.  We would have bombed the shit out of Germany if we had needed to.

IIRC Potsdam was one of the first targets suggested.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


So the were allies!
In view of Hitlers well broadcast ambitions laid out in Mein Kampf. lebensraum. 'living space.' His hatred for Bolshevism, his massive arms build up. His entry into Czechoslovakia. I'm not surprised 
the Soviets made a pact with him because they new the inevitable would soon come and needed time. Which he gave them initially.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...








I have.  I have been to several celebrations on Mamayev Kurgan.  I have walked the grain silo in Stalingrad with the soldiers who fought there.

You?


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




so, to be clear, you are giving stalin a pass for allying with nazi germany and starting wwii, with the joint invasion of poland?


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> Oh? You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. 1942 and 1943 respectively.



Good example

Could Patton and Montgomery have defeated Rommel if Rommel was fully supplied?  Germany diverted his support to Russia and Yugoslavia. 
Rommel didn’t lose, he ran out of gas.

Germany was overextended and had to make military trade offs 
North Africa and Italy were part of that.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



LOL

So says Mama Home Skool

Look at me, I is a Teecher!
Todays class is on Cut and Paste


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oh? You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. 1942 and 1943 respectively.
> ...




geez, suddenly, when it casts American enemies in a better light, suddenly, you remember how important supplies and resources are....

mmm, funny how that works....


hilariously so.


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


/----/ The only difference between Hitler and Stalin is the Nazis had snapper uniforms.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oh? You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. 1942 and 1943 respectively.
> ...









Rommel wasn't fully supplied because we kept sinking their supply ships.  You purposely ignored the American invasions in the Med to support your weak ass claim.

Like I said, dumbwinger.   I don't need to look this stuff up.  I KNOW the history. 

You better catch up.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?



Umm...yea
He deserves credit.

Not only for building the Arsenal of Democracy, but for allowing an ally to do most of the fighting and dying for him.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

Cellblock2429 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...




everyone looks better in black.


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


Family, who captured Berlin,
field spy unit, from the age of 17 in war,
didn't hold anything but a pen and paper before.

Then returned to ruined home all skin and bones,
brought up his family in honor and even adopted orphans.

True heroes, true men, 
with strong women behind them.

This thread is a disgrace!


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Cellblock2429 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...



Probably true

But we sided with Stalin because we didn’t give a shit about Eastern Europe and wanted to rescue Western Europe.  

Stalin was the lesser of two evils and not as much a threat to US interests


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Cellblock2429 said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...




Beyond the humor.....it's true.


. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." November 27, 1925.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?
> ...




there is a level of performance that is just "meets expectations". 

not sending in American forces before they are ready, is that. no merits, no demerits.  nothing to brag about.


that "ally" was in that situation, solely because of that "ally's" actions, ie, allying with fucking hitler and starting wwii.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Ha ha ha and what are you?

You seriously expect anyone to seriously believe the Soviets killed all  20 million of their own practically their entire losses in WWll? 

What were the Nazi's doing outside Leningrad, Moscow and in Stalingrad -how did they get there?
Were they just sat on their ass watching the Soviets?

You seriously need to leave the cursor and go get treatment for your serious mental health issues.

Zionist Holocaust deny'er - I've never heard the like!


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


Like it or not, FDR played his hand expertly. 

He executed wars in two major theaters and met his objectives in both.  

You and PC wanted Hitler to win


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




if you really believed your claim, ie that fdr did "expertly", you would have presented historical examples of his "expert handling" to bolster your claim.


instead you make an absurd godwin.


right there, you implicitly admit that you can't back up your claim, with historical facts. 


you lose.


my point stands. fdr, at best, for most of the war, get a "meets expectation" with demerits for yalta and his fourth term.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


Already explained how he built the Arsenal of Democracy which included two types of Atomic Bombs and played Stalin to get him to do most of the fighting against Hitler

What would you have done differently?

What would you have gotten at Yalta


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


Forgive me, I know you are a Jewish member and ask purely through curiosity not criticism.
There are several other Jewish members and I can't help notice that any debate centred around the Holocaust you never comment on?

Did you never notice for example that Sunni Man posts a Holocaust denial video with every post?
His mate 'Political chic' refuses to admit she is a denier though she claims to be a Zionist.
You waffle on about "militant secularists" and completely ignore what i would have thought would be a burning issue for you. I'm sick and tired challenging umpteen anti-Semitic and Holocaust denial posts without any support from Jewish members.

Is it possible to be both a Zionist and a holocaust denier?
Why do you refuse to defend yourselves?


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...



1. America was an industrial powerhouse well before fdr. that we could build a lot of shit, had nothing to do with him.

2. what would i have done differently? recognized that germany was not likely to win, against the usa, the uk and russia. declare them not allies but co-belligerent and made any lend lease aid, contingent on promises and concessions. 

3. promises that would be expected to be kept or would be enforced.

4. and made that clear to the American people. that marxist soviet union was nearly as clear a threat as their former ally, nazi germany.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > So, FDR did not immediately jump to stalin's demands and throw American lives into a battle they were not prepared for, and you want to give him credit for that?
> ...









George C. Marshall built the Arsenal of Democracy in spite of fdr's efforts to prevent it.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...









Your fathers sacrifice aside, the reason why his home was a ruin was because his government didn't give a shit about him.

And, no.  This thread is not a disgrace.  Heroism is knowingly placing yourself in harm's way in the clear knowledge that you probably won't survive the experience,  yet you do it anyway to save your friends, fellow soldiers, or family.

Merely surviving an incredibly unpleasant experience is a wonderful thing, but it ain't heroic.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








Fdr actively worked to keep our military weak, even when it became obvious that a new war was coming.  Marshall is the reason why we were able to ramp up production so fast.  He worked quietly behind the scenes to keep companies alive that he knew would benefit the US military in the coming war.

It was FDR's inaction that allowed so many of our soldiers to be killed in such a short time.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...










He did nothing but hinder Marshall,  THE man who built the Arsenal.  Fdr benefitted from having some incredible people around him who were able to succeed in spite of his efforts to screw them up.


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


They didn't just "survive unpleasant experience"
but  moved on and defeated the reich.

They even defeated America, ideologically from within,
but You refused to look or listen when people told You decades ago.

You don't understand Russians, 
and prob. never will.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...





"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America?


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Leninists, Marxists, Stalinists ...You name it.
Why do I have to be 'proud' about something for pointing out?

My constant contention throughout our exchange is that -

they all filled a void in American society,
and instead of minimal intellectual introspection,
all I get is a bunch of nervous infantile defensive reactions.

All suggesting denial is vast,
and problem is even worse.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...




IF they were a real threat, as you admit they were, attacking them, then and now, would be the healthy and smart response.


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


I don't know how You reach such 'complex' conclusions,
but in Israel we say _"if granny had rollerblades..."_


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Cant possibly know what Stalin was thinking, but from his position watching Nazi build up, Czechoslovakia, Hitlers ambitions in Mein Kampf, he had more to worry about than Britain or France. He probably guessed that if he devided Poland with the Nazi's and the Nazi's made the first move in invading, Britain & France would declare war on Germany and wouldn't be foolish enough to declare war on him as they would have their hands full and was too far away for the Brit / French
alliance to have any serious effect. So from a Soviet point of view and without hindsight yes he made the right decision.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...






Given another chance, you booted it again.

"They even defeated America, ideologically from within, "


Are you claiming that they were Marxists, and you are proud of how this ideology has corrupted America? 


Clearly it is pointless to engage with you.


Interesting that both you and Netanyahu have the same nick name…”BB”…him due to his first name, you, due to brain size.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...




you're talking about how marxist from europe came here and defeated us by filling a vacuum of ideas.

then and now, honestly and harshly judging the idea and the people on their merits or lack there of, would have been then, and is now, a fine defense against that type of thing.

marxists, no matter how good of a job they might have done fighting nazis, are still bad guys and should be treated as such.


not glorified like rw wants to. not invited to immigrate there, or join our universities. or worse yet, governments.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


See you ignored my question as much s you ignore anti-Semitic attacks.

No matter it seems a universal Jewish policy.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...





that is very generous of you, you are very understanding and generous to stalin, one of the greatest mass murderers of all time. 

yet, when looking at Americans of that same time period, you assume the worst, ie that wacism would have prevented them from fighting the nazis with nuclear weapons.


why does stalin get such generosity, and Americans don't?


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


You give up?

Well I'm not surprised, I warned you from the start you were in for a thrashing as a ripped your dumb arguments apart. but I'm surprised at how easy you capitulated!


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


FDR selected Marshall and made him the most powerful General


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



All that and still can't address a single point?

Well...


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...



Ideas are mobile enough to move without immigration.
Soviets subverted the American society.

When USSR fell,
it was already too late.

Russians know Americans well,
can't say the opposite.


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


What question, what universal policy?


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...










Oh, you're wrong.   The Republic hasn't fallen yet.  The Soviet Union collapsed, but evil people do evil things.  Evil people are being constantly bred.

You can't get rid of them, you can only control them for short periods at a time.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








Actually he rose through the ranks and FDR had no other choice.  Churchill called Marshall the "organizer of victory".

He understood that without Marshall the Germans would have won.


----------



## Decus (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...



How ignorant of you for saying this:

_"Perhaps it might be because the soviets were over 500 miles away having liberated - Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland single handedly, and were approaching Germany's eastern border."_

The Soviet Union was Russia and their conquered territories. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians. The Russians conquered Crimea, Hungary, Belarus, Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, and Poland and installed puppet governments. There was no voluntary union on the part of the conquered territories.

.


----------



## rylah (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...



Hope I'm wrong.

We talk different things - You only see it when a country falls,
I'm talking about ideological subversion, when a critical generational mass reached.

That happened what, already 2 generations ago?
Folks keep drawing Russian caricatures...


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

Decus said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


The Soviet Union was the Republics I mentioned bar Poland.

Your contradicting yourself!

_"The *Soviet* Union was *Russia and their conquered territories*. So drop the term "soviets" and refer to them as what they are: Russians"._

Union of *Soviet *Socialist Republics.

Those Republics adopted the Red Flag hammer & sickle. Whether there was popular support at least initially I don't know. but that is beside the point. The Nazi's had invaded them and the point I made to 'political chic' who asked - _"Why did the Soviets play no part in liberating France, Holland etc."_  (yes, -I can't believe she  asked it either) was because they were busy liberating their former Soviet Republics from the Nazi's and were hundreds of miles away on the other side of Germany.

Hope this helps!


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...








Yes, the education system has been subverted.  But the Republic can still be saved.  I am betting that we do.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


There is no doubt the Soviet Union failed. 
I think though even you republicans now accept Marxism is a superior ideology and the search for a new form of Marxism is on and it could possibly/probably break through in the US.

Were all hoping!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...




I wonder if you've found what I have: I was lucky enough to attend the best schools in the world, yet I found that my real education took place after college.

Once my education was directed by  no one but myself, I could ask and find answers that university didn't.


----------



## Decus (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Decus said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...



Let me make it simple for you - the Russians didn't liberate anyone.

.


----------



## Indeependent (Aug 18, 2020)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...


Many Russians had no choice.
Stalin sent them into battle without weapons and told them to take the rifles of German soldiers after they froze to death.
Stalin was a POS.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...





This was earlier in the thread:

*3. *"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin



And.....



World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but *only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans.* Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army.  "The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.



And.....



"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost."






						Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century
					

Website no longer available | Heroes and killers of the 20th century




					www.moreorless.net.au
				










Tom Clancy has a hero combat soldier exclaim his opinion about the thugs who ran the Soviet Union, the communists:



"Misha waved his hand, looking in annoyance at the way it shook. "I have never had much respect for the chekisti. When I was leading my men, they were there-behind us. They were very efficient at shooting prisoners-prisoners that real soldiers had taken. They were also rather good at murdering people who'd been forced to retreat. I even remember one case where a chekist lieutenant took command of a tank troop and led it into a fucking swamp. At least the Germans I killed were men, fighting men. I hated them, but I could respect them for the soldiers they were. Your kind, on the other hand… perhaps we simple soldiers never really understood who the enemy was. Sometimes I wonder who has killed more Russians, the Germans-or people like you?" “The Cardinal of the Kremlin,”p. 383







So those ‘great loses’ were not at the hands of the Germans, they were by their own leaders. Someone should have told Roosevelt.



Oh…wait….they did!



Love is blind.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...








Marxism is superior in making dead people.   That is the only thing it is better at.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rylah said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...





and if we were not smart enough to be defensive and harsh to them then, time to start now.


you state that we were attacked and defeated by these people/ideas at the same time you are calling us out for being defensive.


one of us is not making much sense.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...




we realize no such thing. we reject you and your works.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...




That one is the poster child for government schooling.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

Decus said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > Decus said:
> ...


Lets make it even simpler for you - the Soviets did loads of liberating.

Your head is clearly up your ass!


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Decus said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...




exchanging oppression by nazis for oppression by stalinists, is not being liberated.


----------



## Decus (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Decus said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...



Liberated is a term that cannot be applied to what the Russians did. The Russians simply fought to acquire territory from the Nazis. One occupier replaced by another.

.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...


_2This was earlier in the thread:

*3. *"Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"

Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin"_

*As I already pointed out the article refers to 20 million killed in the purges, gulags, etc in the 20's & 30's and has nothing to do with WWll.

And to 'westwall'  Why do you give 'political fruitcake' the thumbs up for this post?*

Are you seriously saying the Nazi's killed "very few" Soviets?
And (just as a matter of interest) are you also a Holocaust denier?

Id think carefully before replying your credibility is at stake.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Decus said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...








Yeah, they "liberated" and then sent those poor people to the gulag.  One of the most heroic soldiers the Soviets had fought for weeks in Brest litovsk after the Germans had moved on.  He was all alone in the citadel there.  He fought until finally a german was able to drop a grenade on him which screwed him up enough to enable them to capture him.  he gets sent to a POW camp and then, when he survives that, and is "liberated" they Soviets sent him to the gulag because he had been "tainted by the West"

That's how despicable those marxist scumbags are.,


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...








No, the gulags killed at least 60 million.  Like I said, marxism is only real good at making people dead.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

Decus said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > Decus said:
> ...


Aren't you jumping ahead a bit?
Prior to WWll the Republics we are referring to where all part of the USSR.

Did you never notice during countless Olympics. Ukrainian, Belorussian, Georgian athletes etc standing proudly and smiling on the rostrum with their medals under the Soviet flag to the strains of the Soviet anthem?


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


So you refuse to answer my questions!


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...








I didn't see your questions.  So, in order, The German Wehrmacht killed a lot of soldiers and civilians.  Millions.  Just not 27 million.  Conservatively I would say they are responsible for at least 7.5 million Soviet casualties.  Maybe as many as 10 million.  

The holocaust absolutely happened and my credibility is just fine, thank you.  Yours, not so much.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Cellblock2429 said:


> Tommy Tainant said:
> 
> 
> > Cellblock2429 said:
> ...


20 MILLION vs 500,000--there is NO arguing that


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

....the Russians did MUCH more than in beating Germany than the other allies put together


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


the US was not going to beat Russia--not even close


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


....you never even served and are pissing on brave soldiers' graves????!!!!!!!
...you are worse than BLM/Dems/etc


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


1. they didn't need the industrial might of the US--Russia was too big to conquer
2. most of the fighting was done on the Ost Front--without it, the Western Front would've had a lot more dead--a lot more time getting the Germany


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oh? You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. 1942 and 1943 respectively.
> ...


exactly--not only did they have the supplies, they had the intel--








						Ultra and the Battle for North Africa (1941-43) | World History
					





					worldhistory.us


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


..German production went UP during the bombing--bombing wasn't going to win the war


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...




the point being discussed was whether or not we would have used nukes on a white country. 

the obvious answers is yes. the lefty cries wacism.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


.....VE day was May--Trinity test was July


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




correct.  which is why it did not happen. the lefty claims that it would NOT have happened, because we would never use nukes on a white country. because wacism.


pretty fucking stupid, huh?


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...


VE Day was May...Trinity was July


----------



## Indeependent (Aug 18, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


Sending millions of your citizens to war ill-equipped and ill-dressed is murder.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


the Panzers were not there at DDay


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


....can you give that page number and who said that, please?..I see it in the later posts--about the racism


----------



## Indeependent (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Did we need the Soviets to bleed them? Nope. It's nice that they did, but it wasn't necessary
> ...


The Soviet winter killed tons Nazis.
What's a 2nd Tier Troop?  You think everyone who goes to war is Jason Bourne?


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


1. enemy of my enemy is my friend--Russia did MOST of the fighting
2. so they had half of Europe--so what?  and then the US went into an economic BOOM--up!! 
3. it saved thousands of US lives =immeasurable $$$$$




__





						The Postwar Economy: 1945-1960 < Postwar America < History 1994 < American History From Revolution To Reconstruction and beyond
					





					www.let.rug.nl


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Oz and the Orchestra said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


proven by your pissing on brave soldiers' graves


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...




oz said it, post 96





__





						Honoring The Sacrifices Of The Soviet Union in WWII….Really?
					

in the scale of wwii, a similar nuking of Germany would have been completely acceptable to any reasonable person. and yes, that would be far preferable to eastern europe not living under communism for 45 years, not to mention avoiding the terrible cost of the Cold War.   I can’t believe what a...



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > It's been estimated that 90% of all the German soldiers killed in combat during WWll were killed on the Russian front.  ...
> ...


..you post 25 MILLION deaths and they don't deserve credit??  you PROVE they do
hahahahhahahahahahahahah


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


would've been a Cold War no matter what


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




this thread is about the way, even today, that that alliance born of a common enemy is used today by lefties to glorify the commies and to distact from the historical fact that communism is just as genocidal and oppressive as fascism.

some of that has wandered into examining the actual history and actions of people like fdr and whether what they did was brillant, or barely adequate or worse.

for instance, rightwinger gave credit to fdr for getting the soviets to fight and kill so many nazis. 


except, fdr did not cause that. stalin was a loyal friend and ally to hitler, right up to the moment nazi forces crossed into the soviet union with genocidal intent.


thus, ,giving fdr credit for that, is, imo, utterly uncalled for.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




a cold war, with the border on the far side off poland, would have been very different from one with the border in the middle of germany.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


no, it's about honoring the SACRIFICES of Russia--that's the title 
25 MILLION is a lot of sacrifice --more than any other country gave


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




the op clarifies it quite a bit.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


hey Pal, the Cold War was mostly fought nowhere near there:
Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos
Cuba
Afghanistan 
Korea
etc etc
not counting non-combat areas like:
Pakistan 


			https://scholarworks.arcadia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=agsjournal


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


....no he doesn't--he's PISSING on soldiers' graves--what a jackass--he/she never served either


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


oh yeah, in the Middle East also--
so--like I said--doesn't matter where the border was


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Stalin was a POS.



Yes he was
But he managed to defeat the Nazis


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




even so. flipping all of eastern europe would have made the cold war, a lot less scary.

the soviet union had a real ability to roll the tanks over west germany and france, thus ending up, with world domination.


double the distance required for a clear win, and the possibility of a victory becomes more remote making the temptation to even try, far less.


that would have been a better world.

hell, maybe if the balance of power was in our favor enough, the cold war would not have happened at all.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Stalin was a POS.
> ...




ha, back to just repeated unsupported assertions of your original position?


accepted as an admission that you have utterly failed to support your conclusion and have given up.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




tens of millions of people not living under totalitarian oppression and instead being on the side of the west, doesn't matter?


i respectfully disagree.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


Russia didn't defeat Germany? !!??


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




not the way rightwinger means it. 


ie as a solitary achievement that should be used to glorify communism and diminish the American contributions.


except for fdr of course. he deserves a lot of glorification too.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...




If there is any question as to which dictatorship would have won......there is no question.

Germany would not have conquered the USSR.

Hitler knew that....and so must have Roosevelt.

Here are the facts:
.. when Operation Barbarossa started on June 22, 1941, *the available (German) supplies of fuel, tires, spare parts etc., were only good enough for about two months.....*

Stalin, in fact, had been supplying resources to Hitler.

The Wehrmacht continued to advance, albeit *very slowly, and by mid-November *some units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But the *troops were now totally exhausted, and running out of supplies. Their commanders knew that it was simply impossible to take Moscow.*
Hitler s Failed Blitzkrieg against the Soviet Union. The Battle of Moscow and Stalingrad Turning Point of World War II Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization
72 Years Ago, December 1941: Turning Point of World War II
'The Victory of the Red Army in front of Moscow was a Major Break'…
by Jacques Pauwels



By attacking in June,* Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.*
He didn't.


So....once one recognizes that Stalin was going to be the winner.....
....why did FDR send him supplies that the Allies could have used?

The schools hide the truth to shield FDR from richly deserved contumely.

Same reason so many universities eschew teaching the French Revolution....students might recognize that it gave birth to every totalitarian revolution in modern times.





"....realistically middle sized *Germany could not defeat the much larger Ussr *in the long term. Germany would have eventually surrendered to the western allies to prevent total occupation by the USSR ..."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence (comment)


 "Between June 22, 1941, and January 31, 1942, the Germans had lost 6,000 airplanes and more than 3,200 tanks and similar vehicles; and no less than 918,000 men had been killed, wounded, or gone missing in action, amounting to 28.7 percent of the average strength of the army, namely, 3,2 million men.[33]

(In the Soviet Union, Germany would lose no less than 10 million of its total 13.5 million men killed, wounded, or taken prisoner during the entire war; and *the Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killed *in the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


The American public never would have tolerated the carnage involved in beating the Soviets 

We could have done it, but it never would have been worth it


----------



## Dick Foster (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


Well they did have a tough time of it after Hitler played Stalin like a fish. But then Stalin probably killed as  many as Hitler did in the Ukrane and both of the bastards killed off Poles like there was no tomorrow. In the end we should have listened to both Churchill and Patton. Of course FDR being a commie asshole himself didn't help any.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




if the public had not been lied to about what the soviets were or who stalin was, they could have been prepared for the possibility of it.

and with that leverage, stalin could have been pushed back into his own pre-war borders.


THAT would have been an accomplishment by fdr, worthy of the praise you heap on him.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


1. there will always be and have been millions of people living under oppression---
--2. not worth US lives
3. Korea was not worth 50,000 US lives
--a. now we are competing with SKorea economically
4. the US CAN'T save the world!!! CAN'T change POLITICS and cultures of other countries
a. we go in to help and a lot of those people think we are invaders/colonialist:
==let me end this point [ undeniably ]  with a PERFECT example of how we MURDERED/killed hundreds of thousands and FKd up totally--by trying to save oppressed people--while getting 50,000 American lives WASTED:
Vietnam


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...





You imbecile......the Soviets killed those Russians.


If stupidity were an element on the Periodic Chart, the symbol would be your picture.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


What choice did we have in getting the Soviets to give up an Eastern Europe that they fought and died to win?


How do you propose to dislodge them?


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



How do you explain Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk and countless other slaughters that defeated the Nazis?


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


the Germans had nothing to do with it????!!!!
ahahahahahhahahahahahahaha


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




a valid ideological position. but one that was completely defeated in the wwii and cold war eras.


the question(s) being discussed here, are based on the assumption that we got involved in wwii, and there was likely going to be a post wwii conflict with the su.


----------



## Correll (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




same way i did before, and you failed to address then, so, why are you pretending to not remember? it was only earlier today.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


1. pushed back at what cost in lives???!!!  --and what for? I just pointed out there would be no difference where the border was
2. do you understand the MONUMENTAL differences in manpower between Russia and the West???!!!--it's NOT going to be ''pushed back'''
3. JESUS CHRIST----!! you think we attack Russia and they will stop fighting when the US *wants *to stop [ at the border ]?????????!!!!!!
WOW!!
..when you start a war, you don't know where it will go or how long--like Vietnam


----------



## Indeependent (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


I actually believe RWer remembers nothing.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


sounds like babble---
--we are discussing saving oppressed people --saving the world


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Germany had many Divisions that were ill trained, ill equipped and poorly led. Germany was overextended on many fronts.

Their main priority was the Eastern Front


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

..I've been reading and researching WW2 for over 40 years
..I'm on WW2Forum and even some of those ''experts'' make the mistake a lot of people do and you people= you are thinking like it's a board game--unrealistically


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> ..I've been reading and researching WW2 for over 40 years
> ..I'm on WW2Forum and even some of those ''experts'' make the mistake a lot of people do and you people= you are thinking like it's a board game--unrealistically


'''pushing back''' the Russians .....THAT is board gamish--unrealistic


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

.....the US will just ''push back'' the Russians...........................?????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
the Germans had MORE power than the US had and it was the Germans who got pushed back


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



The public understood what dead soldiers were and that this was not a war on our own territory or a war for our survival. 

After 400,000 deaths, they would not have tolerated a million deaths in an ideological fight against communism.

You were not going to push the Soviets back from territory they lost 20 million people for without a savage fight.

The US public would not have stood for  it.


----------



## rightwinger (Aug 18, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


You claim Stalin did not defeat the Germans......I provided examples.  Battles far more destructive than the ones the US fought in.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> ..I've been reading and researching WW2 for over 40 years
> ..I'm on WW2Forum and even some of those ''experts'' make the mistake a lot of people do and you people= you are thinking like it's a board game--unrealistically




Nothing stuck, huh?

A learning disability????


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








The US provided them with millions of tons of food and munitions, thousands of aircraft and tanks, and we gave them 600,000 trucks.  We mobilized their entire army.

You are factually wrong in all cases.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...








Yes, but their transportation went DOWN.   And, the Germans didn't enter full war production till the end of 1944.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...







Actually,  they were.  But one very brave British Paratrooper knocked out the lead tank as it was approaching Pegasus Bridge.

Once again you are wrong


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


doesn't refute the point
bombing was not going to win the war
they transported a lot to get Wacht Am Rhein going in late 1944
...the German lines of communication were SHORTENING, not lengthening


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


hahahhahahaha
babble


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


you don't know what you are talking about
.....the Germans were not going to beat Russia--with or without US industrial help


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...








Russia didn't sacrifice.  They SQUANDERED their people.  The leadership didn't give two shits about their soldiers.  Know why you can't find Soviet uniforms from WWII?  Because they made them super cheap because their life expectancy was 4 weeks.  Or how about their penal battalions?  Piss off the commissar and get sent to one of those where they make you link arms and march you through minefields to clear them.  

They didn't sacrifice shit, they used people up because they didn't care about them.  A tank was more valuable than the people inside it.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Stalin was a POS.
> ...








No, he won in spite of himself.  His actions almost led to the collapse of the USSR in the first months of the German invasion.  Fortunately for him he had a few really great generals left, that he hadn't ordered murdered in his purges.  Koniev was probably the best followed by Tukachevsky.  They saved his incompetent ass.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...








Totally false.  By the time we met at the Elba the US Army was the most accomplished, best equipped, best outfitted army in the world.  Bar none.  But what would have won the war for us is our airpower.  The Soviets had no counter to us and we would have won air supremacy over the USSR in short order.  Then, just like what we did with the Germans, the Soviet armies couldn't go anywhere without having the crap bombed out of them.

We would have demolished them in short order.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...








Easy.  Tell them to leave.  Then, if they chose to fight you destroy their airforce, and then their tank forces.  After that it is a simple walk.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


you are out of your mind if you think we could beat Russia
..the Germans had airpower also
...AND  Germany was fighting on TWO fronts--against the 2 largest countries
..the US is not going to beat Russia
..please give us a scenario of the US taking over Russia
..there are very, very  few instances of a country totally taking over another in war--especially post WW1


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


you, also, think it's a board game/etc 
..just like people think we would could've cakewalked into Hanoi


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


hitler thought the same thing


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...






Those defeats were mainly do to Hitler and his stupid Fuhrer orders.  Had he been killed early, Generals Like Manstein and Balck, not to mention Strachwitz, would have been able to bleed to Soviet armies dry.  Balck alone destroyed a force ten times his size with minimal losses.  Strachwitz, while a colonel led four MK IV panzers into Russian territory and destroyed at least 105 T-34's for no loss.  There simply was no one on the Soviet side who could match their ability at mobile warfare.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> .....the US will just ''push back'' the Russians...........................?????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> the Germans had MORE power than the US had and it was the Germans who got pushed back







No, they didn't.  The US had air supremacy over germany.  Nothing moved during the day.  Nothing.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


you have proof of that? 
more game board playing by you 



> There simply was no one on the Soviet side who could match their ability at mobile warfare.


but the Germans LOST


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > .....the US will just ''push back'' the Russians...........................?????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...


again--and to close this discussion:
hitler thought the same thing


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > .....the US will just ''push back'' the Russians...........................?????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...


but you said:
There simply was no one on the Soviet side who could match their ability at mobile warfare.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...








I never said it was.  At least the strategic bombing.  The 2nd Tactical Airforce though, they were the most effective unit we had for the destruction of German Panzers.  Guess what, they destroy Soviet ones too.  And just as easily.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...








Had Stalin not recovered, they had a real chance.  But they had to do it early, and they simply ran out of time.  Had they invaded earlier, instead of attacking the Balkans, there is a 50/50 chance they could have won.  That extra time before the Soviet winter came and halted them in their tracks was key.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


hitler said the same thing you are saying now --and Germany got beat


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...







No, the Germans didn't.  You claim to be on the WWII forum but you don't seem to know too much.  And the USA didn't need to beat Russia.  All we needed to do was kick them out of western Europe.  That is all we needed to do.  And we could have.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


WOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ..you fk up again
..we have these threads on WW2F
hahahahahh

 IF IF IF IF IF IF IF IF I FIFI IFIFI IF IF IF I FI IF IF
IF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wrong..if they did that IF that did this 
1. bullshit babble
2. there is always a COUNTER to any IF scneario
3. again, you are playing board games


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








No, I don't.  I have walked the battlefields with the soldiers who fought at those places.  I also work with some of the best WWII researchers in the world.  The US Army Air Force was the most powerful single military unit in the world.  The 8th Airforce alone would have been sufficient to deal with the remnants of the Soviet Air force.  And we had the 9thAF, the 12thAF, the 15thAF, the 2nd Tactical Airforce,  plus the RAF to throw in to the mix.  We would have swept the skies clear in short order.  

And no one with a brain think that hanoi would have been a cake walk.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...









Yes, but he was crazy, and didn't follow the advice of his Generals who knew what they were doing.  We did.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


..if hitler got the ABomb AND a long range bomber AND a huge naval force AND 200,000 thousand more men, AND this and That


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...







Which is absolutely true.  Look at the kesselschlachts.  Germany won every one of them.  The only time they lost is when hitler stepped in and issued a fuher order.


----------



## whitehall (Aug 18, 2020)

Ike's forces were held outside of Berlin while the Russian hoard was allowed to loot the city and rape the women. Who made that decision, Marshall or FDR? Mobs of Russians overran Hitler's bunker and today we still don't have a definitive forensic profile on his death. FDR used to share private jokes with (uncle Joe) Stalin at Churchill's expense. Was the aging, dying president a victim of bad advice or was he a closet socialist?


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...








No, no board games.  Though they might help you.  No, like I said, I work with some of the best historians on the planet.  You get angry when you shouldn't.  This is a discussion.  Either discuss the facts, and stop whining, or go away.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...







Hitler could have never obtained the A-bomb thanks to Heisenberg who stole the documents the Germans needed when he fled to the USA.  Germany was trying to build a hydrogen bomb, not knowing you need a fission bomb to set it off.

So, are you going to discuss things, or whine like a child and throw tantrums?


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

whitehall said:


> Ike's forces were held outside of Berlin while the Russian hoard was allowed to loot the city and rape the women. Who made that decision, Marshall or FDR? Mobs of Russians overran Hitler's bunker and today we still don't have a definitive forensic profile on his death. FDR used to share private jokes with (uncle Joe) Stalin at Churchill's expense. Was the aging, dying president a victim of bad advice or was he a closet socialist?







My vote is socialist.  He loved Uncle Joe.  The American progressives always did.  They lauded Stalin as a hero for murdering millions of farmers during the collectivisation of the farms.  Progressives are universally scum.


----------



## Dick Foster (Aug 18, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


The atomic bomb choice, you hopless dumbass. At the time only we had it.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


...oh and the other thing on transportation = they did well at the Hurtgen Battle in late 1944-45...transportation was more than adequate..they gave the US a whoopin


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Germany didn't have any airpower on the Ost Front???!!!


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...








LOL, they only had to go a couple of miles!  Hodges was worn out and shouldn't have been in command.  He was the wrong man at the wrong time.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

Dick Foster said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


if they used them on the Russians, then they wouldn't have any for Japan 
...the Abombs would not have dislodged even half the Russian force


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


exactly---hahahahahah--then why is transportation so important ?


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...






Shit, you need to read some history from somebody other than your propagandists!  The German Luftwaffe by 1944 was a shadow of its former self.  Most squadrons could only muster two, maybe three aircraft on any one day.  And that is if they had the fuel to get them going.  Read some of the squadron histories dude, they were toast.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...







Ummmmm, the Hurtgen forest is IN Germany.  Or did you not know that?  And transportation was important for US.  We had to get the supplies to our troops.  And we did.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Dick Foster said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








Ummmm, we were building more.  Just sayin....


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


AND another IF scenario...IF they had another commander
.....hey pal, I just went over this in WW2F!!!! big time...and we went over this last year
hahahahah--it wasn't the commander or really the Germans--it was the MSR!!!!!!!!!.....MSR!!!!!!!..the MSR was horrible == do you know how this ties in to one of the most important aspects of battles????!!!! = *logistics.*......
..I just posted numerous quotes/links/etc on this in WW2F


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


you just PROVED you don't know much at all
you fked up ---you didn't get to read my previous post--NO we didn't get supplies in--let me get my book on it -page 416 _Three Battles_ by MacDonald and Mathews:
''''.....factors....to bring failure.......an inadequate and unprotected main supply route''''
...they lost numerous tanks BEFORE battle just trying to navigate the '''MSR''', it was so crappy ......


----------



## harmonica (Aug 18, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Dick Foster said:
> ...


hitler said the same thing


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...







Ummm, DUH!  It's what I have been saying all along!  Try and keep up!


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...









Yeah, imagine that.  Tanks hard a hard time in the WOODS!  Jeezus, you are a simpleton.  All you have are simplistic statements and insults.  Grow up.


----------



## westwall (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...







He was building more nukes?  Really?  Name ONE that the Germans completed.  Mr. simpleton.


----------



## Doc7505 (Aug 18, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...




Excellent!! You've captured the essence of Marxist Socialist leadership....  Who will be the Chekists' of the future in America?


----------



## Doc7505 (Aug 18, 2020)

konradv said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...




~~~~~~
One can then believe that you hold  Nikita Khrushchev: Butcher of the Ukraine. in high esteem. Khrushchev earned his title during the Red Terror when Stalin sent him to “earn his spurs” in *Ukraine* by managing the slaughter of and estimated 4.5 million Ukrainians of the “class enemy.”


----------



## Doc7505 (Aug 18, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




Perhaps the readers on this board might be interested in the following




__





						Murmansk
					





					www.armed-guard.com
				



XXXXXXXXXXXX​








						Lend-Lease tanks and aircrafts
					

Lend-Lease tanks and aircraft for the Red Army 1941 to 1945. Figures of supplied armored vehicle and aircraft types from the United States and Britain to Soviet Union during the Second World War. The Red




					ww2-weapons.com


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


....not woods--hahahahhaha the poor MSR...tanks can't go through a bunch of trees
you've failed on all of your points....


----------



## JohnHI (Aug 19, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...


Thank you for your words! I knew some people from russia\SU they told me " if you want to know little bit more about Soviet Union people bravery look at the Siege of Leningrad". Really,do you think civil people were not surrender to the nazis for 2 years and 4 months only because they fear to be shot by Stalin? And yes Soviets did shot their own, but as far as I know, they did this only in case of soldiers leaving field of battle without an order.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 19, 2020)

whitehall said:


> Ike's forces were held outside of Berlin while the Russian hoard was allowed to loot the city and rape the women. Who made that decision, Marshall or FDR? Mobs of Russians overran Hitler's bunker and today we still don't have a definitive forensic profile on his death. FDR used to share private jokes with (uncle Joe) Stalin at Churchill's expense. Was the aging, dying president a victim of bad advice or was he a closet socialist?




I like your post a great deal, shows, succinctly, an understanding of FDR vis-a-vis Stalin.


"Who made that decision, "


The same one who decided that allied troops should attack Europe via Normandy, rather than straight up through Italy....where they were already conquerors.

Stalin insisted on Normandy, as far from Eastern Europe as possible, so the Red Army would be ready to take over half of Europe....exactly as Roosevelt agreed.


Stalin was also the driving force behind for the demand of 'unconditional surrender' rather than negotiated surrender for Germany.....as a cost of thousands more American lives.


FDR obey all of Stalin's orders....

...most....maybe not in North Africa.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 19, 2020)

westwall said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > Ike's forces were held outside of Berlin while the Russian hoard was allowed to loot the city and rape the women. Who made that decision, Marshall or FDR? Mobs of Russians overran Hitler's bunker and today we still don't have a definitive forensic profile on his death. FDR used to share private jokes with (uncle Joe) Stalin at Churchill's expense. Was the aging, dying president a victim of bad advice or was he a closet socialist?
> ...




I hope you get to see "Mr. Jones" on Netflix.


----------



## Correll (Aug 19, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




if fdr was the leader that you claim he was, there would not have been 400k american deaths and the public would have been prepared for the possibility that defeating nazi german and japan was not the end, not with stalinist russia still in field.


----------



## Correll (Aug 19, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




yes, we covered all that before. when you pretended we did not and started over, that was you admitting that you lost the argument and now have nothing but the logical fallacy of proof by assertion to use to distract from that defeat.


----------



## Correll (Aug 19, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




so, why help them then?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 19, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...





And this:

 Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever that it would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'
Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 19, 2020)

JohnHI said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...





The Russian people know what savages their Bolshevik leaders were:

Russians would do anything not to return to Roosevelt's pal's 'paradise.'

The 850,000 strong army of Gen. Andrei Andreyevich Vlasov, having *gone to the other side, Germany, "to save their country from Stalin" *and having later surrendered to US forces, "formed the core of those forcebly repatritated between 1944 and 1947."
"Operation Keelhaul; The Story of Forced Repatriation from 1944 to the Present.by Julius Epstein p.27, 53.



Gen. Deniken, former commanding general of the White Russian armies which were supported by the USA in 1917-1920, explained that* none of these men served in the Nazi army out of love for Germany..."they hated the Germans" he wrote....rather, they knew what awaited them in the 'Soviet paradise.'



More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "**The Secret Betrayal**"by**Nikolai Tolstoy**, p. 19-20.*

How badly did these individuals not want to go to Stalin's USSR?

From the NYTimes, January 20, 1946:
"Ten renegade Russian soldiers, in a frenzy of terror over their impending repatriation to the homeland, committed suicide today during a riot in the Dachau prison camp...."


Those Russians who hated the communists understood more than do Democrat voters in America.
With their control of the schools and the media, many Americans don’t realize what the Democrat Party is, what it has become. And may not until it is too late.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


but Germany declared war on US,--and they were in a pact with Japan....
..and they did fight themselves to ''a frazzle''


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


see post # 313
..like I said, you people are thinking unrealistically/board games/etc


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


MORE fairytale/unrealistic thinking---
 prepare for MORE war??? with our ALLY!!!!!?????!!!!!!
MORE wasted US deaths???????!!!!!!?= idiocy


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

Correll said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


..why would we be preparing to fight our ALLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > Ike's forces were held outside of Berlin while the Russian hoard was allowed to loot the city and rape the women. Who made that decision, Marshall or FDR? Mobs of Russians overran Hitler's bunker and today we still don't have a definitive forensic profile on his death. FDR used to share private jokes with (uncle Joe) Stalin at Churchill's expense. Was the aging, dying president a victim of bad advice or was he a closet socialist?
> ...


.....hahahah--if no unconditional surrender and pounding of Germany--you get the same thing that happened after WW1---and that was WW2
..if they weren't totally defeated, you get the same shit
..they start the most destructive and deadly war ever--with 6 million gassed to death, and you don't want unconditional surrender!!!!???????


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

whitehall said:


> Ike's forces were held outside of Berlin while the Russian hoard was allowed to loot the city and rape the women. Who made that decision, Marshall or FDR? Mobs of Russians overran Hitler's bunker and today we still don't have a definitive forensic profile on his death. FDR used to share private jokes with (uncle Joe) Stalin at Churchill's expense. Was the aging, dying president a victim of bad advice or was he a closet socialist?


.....so what if they looted and raped?????!!!!!!! godamn---they did a LOT worse than that, before they got there
...it saved a lot of US lives


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

westwall said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


westy is so good, he can see emotions over the internet!!!! hahahahahahhaa
..you are just babbling = you've got nothing


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



hitler said the same thing--and they had the best military in 1941:
 ''''''So confident was he of this that he ignored such inexorable military truths as the vast distances of Russia, the early and cruel winters, the lack of paved roads for his mechanized troops.'''''

''We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down,'' Adolf Hitler told his generals.'''''









						HITLER'S RUSSIAN BLUNDER (Published 1981)
					






					www.nytimes.com


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 19, 2020)

harmonica said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...



You really don't get the meaning of Baldwin's words?

It appears that a facility with the English language is not one of your gifts.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


great rebuttal!!! ---you didn't even have one word relating to my post
hahahhahaha
..so when Germany starts sinking our ships, we should not join in the war--just let them sink our ships........?????


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


so, I ask you, your NYT buddy wants to let Germany  sink our ships and we do nothing.............you AGREE with that?


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


..I love being mentally defective--I still know more than you
hahahahhahahahaha


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 19, 2020)

harmonica said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




You left out   ".....hahahah-- " 



My "NYT buddy."...you moron.


*Hanson Weightman Baldwin* (March 22, 1903 – November 13, 1991) was the long-time military editor of _The New York Times_. He won a Pulitzer Prize "for his coverage of the early days of World War II". He authored or edited numerous books on military topics.








						Hanson W. Baldwin - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				





You have no clue who Baldwin was, and this ignorance appears to extend to every subject at issue.


Please get lost.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


..so, according to you and that Baldwin idiot, we DON'T help our ally---and after we don't help them, then we ATTACK our ally...............??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SMART
ahahahahhahahahahahahahahah


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


..Baldwin is also an idiot---he is not thinking realistically - he's just trying to sell books


----------



## harmonica (Aug 19, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


.....answer the question or are you a coward--in your own thread!!!???
..were we to just like Germany sink our ships and do nothing??
..not go into North Africa? or Italy
Italy would still be in the war!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## westwall (Aug 19, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...








Yeah, hitler was an idiot.  The whole world knows this.  The difference between us and them was we had the production to back up our words.

I have friends who were falschirmjaeger at Cassino.  They were incredibly brave, and as we were eating in the square, and talking about the battle they always remarked on how much ammunition we had.  They related how they had to be very careful and they could only fire their mortars when they had a good target because every time they fired a round, hundreds would come back.

That's the reality.  We not only had the troops, we had the supply to back it up.

Hitler never came close.


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




You pointed out that size differences between germany and russia. It is not unrealistic to judge FDR, for not noticing that too.

It is not unrealistic to judge a war time President, for not giving any consideration for the post war situation.


We, (America and Soviets) had a mutual enemy. That might have made us "allies". FDR acted like it made us friends. 

That was unrealistic of him.


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Alliances end, and former allies can become enemies. Indeed, that is exactly what happened. 

Hell, if Stalin had been less trusting of Hitler, millions of russian lives could have been saved.


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...




Because they were only our ally because the nazis invaded them. Their national security interests and their ideological beliefs placed them in conflict with our interests, other of course than the immediate problem of nazi germany.

AND, it should read, "preparing for a possible fight, with our ally". 


I'm not talking about betraying our ally, but being prepared for them to betray us.


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...




to be fair, we did not know about the holocaust when that policy was set upon. 

and it was 6 million jews. 10 million total. lots of commies and gays and poles and gypsies too.

let's not forget about them.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


...yes we did know about the Jews--my uncle was at Dachau BEFORE the war was over..and there were many reports about it BEFORE that
..and there were many other atrocities KNOWN before that--especially in Russia


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


so---we are going to go to war with Russia-------------------------------for WHAT exactly????!!!! why are we going to fight Russia?


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


.....you are BABBLING now .........alliances end, former allies become enemies!!!!!!

....HEY---ANSWER the question--I've asked many times--this is the LAST time = why are we going to war with Russia???!!!  wars are VERY serious--you just don't/shouldn't go to war because you don't like the other country


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




The policies on lend lease, the decisions to open the "second fronts", ect, all took place before the Holocaust was understood.

that is what i meant. it is important to judge people on what they knew, not what we know now.


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




Not go to war, *be prepared* to go to war with russia, to prevent a rise of a continental hegemon, that would be opposed to and hostile to us and our interests.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


....bullshit--you people are talking about Patton attacking the Russians, and how the border should've been on the other side of Poland, etc
..now you are tripping over yourself----
...so, then, Russia did not and was not opposed to and hostile to us and out interests?? --why prepare then?? 

..god fucking dam!!!!!!!!!!!! if we went to war with every country like that, we be at war with half the world!!!!!!!!

1. we ''''lost'' MANY countries to communism -Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, etc--no change to America--no harm to America
2. the Russians WERE in control east of the Iron Curtain---so what??  no harm to the US

3. no, that is no reason to go to war........


and --the BIG one ==== and ---so you are saying we should be prepared for war--BUT not go to war...................????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!what is that?????
.....????
prepare ---how???
--we were ALREADY ramped up militarily 

gota go, but you people are tripping


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




A lot of people, rightwinger for one example, like to hold up historical figures, such as FDR and Stalin, 

as basically role models, to be looked up to, and learned from.


The idea of doing that, imo, is valid.


BUT, if we are going to do that, we need to look at what they actually did, and what lessons there are to be learned from it.

Rightwinger would have America idolize FDR and use that to support socialism, for one example.


I would have him judged as a mixed bag, with limited lessons to be learned, and certainly not a justification for socialism.


that is what this thread is about.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




I don't believe he was 'trusting' of Hitler.

Evidence is he was using Hitler, just as he used Roosevelt.


. When Hitler began his advances on other countries, Stalin refused to join the nations talking of stopping him. Stalin was, in fact, pleased that Hitler was destroying the old order throughout Europe. "There will be no parliaments, no trade unions, no armies, no governments....then Stalin will come as the liberator...millions of people will be sitting in concentration camps, hoping someone will liberate them, then Stalin and the Red Army will come and liberate them. That was his plan."                Vladimir Bukovsky.


It always was and is a world domination scheme.

The psychopath Stalin was just far smarter than either Hitler or Roosevelt.

Just look at the gains he has made in our nation.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...





It's questionable as to how much of an ally the Soviet entity actually was.

While American presence in Russia was modest and equivocal, Russian presence in wartime America was so large that they had to set up a corporate headquarters on Sixteenth Street in Washington. One of the executives in the huge staff was Victor Kravchenko, metallurgist, engineer, executive, and captain in the Red Army. And the first Soviet “defector.” 
You can read his book on line.



 ‘Moreover, it is obvious that a penetration so complete would have been impossible if the Communists had not been able to depend on the blindness or indifference of many of the far larger number of ordinary liberals who dominated the Roosevelt Administration. As early as the late 1930s, even known Communists in government were often regarded by their colleagues as merely "liberals in a hurry." And during the war, of course, they could be excused as simply enthusiasts for America's doughty ally, "good old Joe." Small wonder, then, that liberals, after the onset of the Cold War with the Soviet Union in 1946, dreaded so profoundly the disclosure of the appalling degree of governmental penetration that they now began to suspect the Communists had achieved on their watch in the 1930s and the first half of the 1940s.’
http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1375/article_detail.asp


On April 1, 1944, Victor Kravchenko left Washington for New York, where, at a press conference arranged by the NYTimes, he revealed the truth about the Soviet Union. Two years later he published “I Chose Freedom,” which played a crucial role in the formation of public opinion in the formation of the incipient Cold War.

The front-page article that began, "Accusing the Soviet Government of a 'double-faced' foreign policy with respect to its professed desire for collaboration with the United States and Great Britain and denouncing the Stalin regime for failure to grant political and civil liberties to the Russian people, Victor A. Kravchenko….” Fleming, Op.Cit.[ p. 182-183]


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




yes, fdr and liberals in general, were far to friendly with the commies.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




Servants of.

The major player in the Alger Hiss saga was fellow Communist, Whitaker Chambers. In his book, _Witness_, Chambers explains his disillusionment as follows. In 1938, he determined not only to break with the Communist Party, but to inform on the Party when he could. The reason was that he was informed that Stalin was making efforts to align with Hitler, in 1939, and “from any human point of view, the pact was evil.” 

As Hitler marched into Poland, Chambers arranged a private meeting with Adolf Berle, President Roosevelt’s assistant Sec’y of State. Chambers detailed the Communist espionage network, naming at least two dozen Soviet spies in Roosevelt’s administration, including Alger Hiss. *Berle reported this to Roosevelt, who laughed, and told Berle to go f--- himself.* (Arthur Herman, Joseph McCarthy: Reexaming the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator, p. 60)

* No action was taken, and in fact, Roosevelt promoted Hiss. *Almost a decade later, Chambers was called before the HUAC and named Hiss as a Soviet agent. Hiss sued Chambers, at which time Chambers presented “… four notes in Alger Hiss's handwriting, sixty-five typewritten copies of State Department documents and five strips of microfilm, some of which contained photographs of State Department documents. The press came to call these the "Pumpkin Papers"(Whittaker Chambers - Wikipedia) And, of course, all doubt was removed in 1995, when the Venona Soviet cables were decrypted.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


Russia was NOT an ally of the US in WW2?????!!!!!!








						Allies and Axis: Who's Who in WWII? | The National WWII Museum Blog
					

Photograph of Phot Phahonyothin (far left) with Hideki Tojo (center) in Tokyo 1942) On this day in 1941, Thailand allied with Japan.  Thailand was valuable for the Axis powers, as their airfields, ports, and railways would be instrumental in planned invasions of Malaya and Burma. The partnership...



					www.nww2m.com
				



hahahahahahahahahahaha


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


more IF s and IFs and IFs.......doesn't matter if he trusted him or not ......that's just another IF scenario--which can be countered by other IFs


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




if we let the marxists like rw write history, they will be teaching the kids that Stalin and FDR deserve the credit for stopping Hitler and we can learn from them. 


That is what rightwinger and tommy taint want to do. 

pointing out that their heroes did not do nearly as well as they pretend, is a valid exercise. 


if you don't want to participate, then don't. 

But, IF you are going to discuss FDR accomplishments, then you have to consider them, against what he alternatives were.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...





"... IF you are going to discuss FDR accomplishments, ...."


And along those lines....


1. Roosevelt offered up the lives of everyone in Eastern Europe to his lord and master, Joseph 'Koba' Stalin



2. He made certain that Stalin's plans continued after his death: the creation of the United Nations



3. He extended the Depression by years.



4. He disposed of the Constitution



5. He imposed Mussolini's Fascist policies and called it 'the New Deal



6. He turned over command of our military actions in WWII to Stalin, and cost multiple thousands of US soldiers' deaths.



7. He made certain that communism survived the war, and thrived afterwards.



8. Without his efforts, there would be no Red China, no Korean War, and no Vietnamese War



*9. ...and he is the proximate explanation for the cultural Marxism prevalent in society today.*



10. He was a racist and a bigot how wanted only those ‘with the right sort of blood.’ Sounds like a Nazis, huh?


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...


right off the bat your # 1 is bullshit
and # 8 is bullshit----FDR is not stopping the Chinese civil war--or any other civil war....you don't know your history
NO ONE is going to stop those civil wars


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...




i have heard/read that we encouraged a ceasefire between the nationalists and the communists so they could focus on fighting the japanese.

good for the war effort. 

bad for the post war world. 


short term thinking vs long term thinking.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




Let me clarify: the Soviet spies that Roosevelt welcomed warmly into his administration worked assiduously against Chiang, and to the benefit of Mao.



FDR's insistence on the Soviet agents who infiltrated his administration resulted in the United States sabotage of Chaing Kai-Shek and the Nationalists in China in favor of the Mao and the Communists. 

From the book “Blacklisted From History,” by M. Stanton Evans: *Soviet agents in the U.S. State department (and Treasury)* worked actively to damage confidence of our government, in the *(Nationalist) Chinese* fighting in their own country, as our allies against the Japanese, and *in favor of the Communist unsurgency of Mao Tse-Tung *and Chou En-Lai.
While Chiang Kai-Shek was busy as our ally fighting the Japanese, White, Currie, Coe, Glasser, and Hiss were doing all they could to undermine him in favor of Mao and the communists.


a. “Another example of [Harry Dexter] *White acting as an agent of influence for the Soviet Union was his obstruction of a proposed $200 million loan to Nationalist China* in 1943, which he had been officially instructed to execute,[52] at a time when inflation was spiraling out of control.”
Harry Dexter White - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

b. [Owen] Lattimore was leaking information to the Soviets while he was an advisor to Chiang Kai-shek and that the *Soviets considered Lattimore to be "working for them".* Freedom of Information/Privacy Act | Federal Bureau of Investigation

c. The spies that FDR put in place continued to move Democrats in the Communist Direction. This, from a newspaper at the time:

"Mr. Truman said that the nationalists should have surrendered because they didn't have a chance to win...the opinion of American ambassador Leighton Stuart was that the *failure of American aid to come at the opportune moment was the real cause of the weakness of nationalists* and the disintegration of their armies....many military commanders went over to the enemy because they saw the United States withdrawing moral support from Chiang Kai-shek. Mr. Truman boldly *defends what Treasury did. He doesn't mention Harry Dexter White,* mentioned in congressional hearings as a communist spy, sat at Treasury with full power to say when the money promised Chiang Kai-shek would be forwarded or withheld." Toledo Blade, Toledo Blade - Google News Archive Search




I'd be happy to prove any of the items I listed in the previous post.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


1. Chic man or girl doesn't seem to want to respond--he-she is a coward in their own thread
2. FDR did NOT offer up the lives of everyone in East Europe--that's just plain bullshit 
3. you are not thinking realistically -doesn't matter what we encouraged --they are going to do what they want!!

4. MOST of your posts and Chics/etc sound like we should have been *concentrating *on POST war --and not *THE* war!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????????????????????????????????????
WTF??
..so enact policies and tactics/strategy NOT to defeat the Axis, but to help us out post war!!  this IS what you are saying 
 =which we didn't have any idea what was going to really happen post war


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


you MUST be joking  hahahhahahahahahahahahahah
concentrate on post war and not winning WW2
..no, you are NOT joking, because that's what you've been posting before = concentrate on post war and not the war


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...





If we want to discuss the people and the polices of the time, looking at the results of the polices, but short term and longer term is fair and reasonable. 


yes, getting the commies and the nationalists to not fight each other and to fight the japanes, I'm sure helped.


but it greatly benefited the commies relative to the nationalists. 


THat led to the Korean War, or at least to it being a lot worse than it could have been.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


1. encourage doesn't mean it happened = you are wrong = because it did not affect post war
2. ALL groups ALL over were fighting each other during the war
Yugoslavia
Italy
France
etc


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...













						Chinese Civil War - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				






"The alliance of CPC and KMT was in name only.[30] Unlike the KMT forces, CPC troops shunned conventional warfare and instead engaged in guerrilla warfare against the Japanese. The level of actual cooperation and coordination between the CPC and KMT during World War II was at best minimal.[30] In the midst of the Second United Front, the CPC and the KMT were still vying for territorial advantage in "Free China" (i.e., areas not occupied by the Japanese or ruled by Japanese puppet governments such as Manchukuo and the Reorganized National Government of China).[30]

The situation came to a head in late 1940 and early 1941 when clashes between Communist and KMT forces intensified. Chiang demanded in December 1940 that the CPC's New Fourth Army evacuate Anhui and Jiangsu Provinces, due to its provocation and harassment of KMT forces in this area. Under intense pressure, the New Fourth Army commanders complied. The following year they were ambushed by KMT forces during their evacuation, which led to several thousand deaths.[31] It also ended the Second United Front, which had been formed earlier to fight the Japanese.[31]

As clashes between the CPC and KMT intensified, countries such as the United States and the Soviet Union attempted to prevent a disastrous civil war. After the New Fourth Army incident, US President Franklin D. Roosevelt sent special envoy Lauchlin Currie to talk with Chiang Kai-shek and KMT party leaders to express their concern regarding the hostility between the two parties, with Currie stating that the only ones to benefit from a civil war would be the Japanese. The Soviet Union, allied more closely with the CPC, sent an imperative telegram to Mao in 1941, warning that civil war would also make the situation easier for the Japanese military. Due to the international community's efforts, there was a temporary and superficial peace. Chiang attacked the CPC in 1943 with the propaganda piece _China's Destiny_, which questioned the CPC's power after the war, while the CPC strongly opposed Chiang's leadership and referred to his regime as fascist in an attempt to generate a negative public image. Both leaders knew that a deadly battle had begun between themselves.[32]

In general, developments in the Second Sino-Japanese War were to the advantage of the CPC, as its guerrilla war tactics had won them popular support within the Japanese-occupied areas. However, the KMT had to defend the country against the main Japanese campaigns, since it was the legal Chinese government, and this proved costly to Chiang Kai-shek and his troops. Japan launched its last major offensive against the KMT, Operation Ichi-Go, in 1944; this resulted in the severe weakening of Chiang's forces.[33] The CPC also suffered fewer losses through its guerrilla tactics. By the end of the war, the Red Army had grown to more than 1.3 million members, with a separate militia of over 2.6 million members. About one hundred million people lived in CPC-controlled zones."


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


.....it's like politics everywhere and today!!  give and take ..scratch my back, I scratch yours
PLUS FDR had advisors/Congress/Military/politicians/etc to listen to and fight with = it's called reality !!!!!!!


----------



## Correll (Aug 20, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




And he did the obvious and politically acceptable.

but that is not the "Great Leader" that people like rw want to paint him as. 

 a GREAT LEADER, could have walked and chewed gum at the same time, ie fought the war with an eye to the post war situations.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 20, 2020)

Correll said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...


holy SHIT!!!!!!!!!!
....do you have any idea how IMMENSELY complicated that was????!!!
you had the Allies--France with de Gaullle --and then much complicated politics and military within just France!! --such as Admiral Darlan/the Free French vs Vichy/etc
--same with Yugoslavia ..same with Italy
....all over
AND you have much discord/arguing among his OWN generals!!! Mac vs Halsey .... and then among the Allied generals--Monty/Patton/etc
....VERY COMPLICATED to say the least -military strategy and politics --WORLD wide---not just in the US....
etc etc
...hahahhahahahahahahahahah
wooooohoooooooooo
Correl and Chic are GODS!!!! like never before!!!!!
FDR could've done it better!!!!!  woooohooooooo
a WORLD wide war and politics ---he could've done it better!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## rylah (Aug 21, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> JohnHI said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Regurgitating Stalinist propaganda with a renewed Western twist,
doesn't look especially enlightened...

How does pulling to other ridiculous extreme,
disregarding the Russian warriors of WWII,
distinguish you from Stalinists?

Following your logic, Stalin and you share a common enemy - simple Russian folk,
only difference being the means of attack.


----------



## Picaro (Aug 21, 2020)

harmonica said:


> Correll said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...



LOl yes, the FDR bashing is just bizarre; we took less casualties than Britain while fighting at one point of three fronts, kept all our allies in the field and the war ended roughly three years after we entered it, but 'FDR screwed it up n stuff'. lol what a hoot.

Hating Democrats is fine, but going nutjob and joining the conspiratorial clown cars isn't going to get any more votes for the GOP just because the WW II generations are mostly dead now and  think they can make up whatever crazy shit you want about it.









						WWII Casualties by Country
					

World War II is considered the deadliest arm conflict in human history. The war left at least 70 million people dead or 3% of the world’s population at the time.




					www.worldatlas.com
				




Outside of Wilkie and a few others, the Republicans would have left the entire European sub-continent to Stalin, and all of Asia to Mao and Stalin while they hid under their beds and cried. Isolationists are rather dumb. Their policies would have left the entire world Red in 20 years.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 21, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JohnHI said:
> ...




Why would I care what you decide.....you're a dunce.


Everything I post is linked, sourced and documented.



Instead of wasting your time here, you should see if you still have the fez and the tin cup, maybe you can get your old job with the organ grinder....


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 21, 2020)

Picaro said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > Correll said:
> ...





Let's take just one example of the service that Roosevelt provided to Stalin.


Stalin required that Germany be unable to resist his occupation of Europe post war. Toward that end he told FDR to demand "unconditional surrender," rather than a negotiated surrender.


" General *Albert Coady Wedemeyer*... was a United States Army commander who served in Asia during World War II from October 1943 to the end of the war. Previously, he was an important member of the War Planning Board which formulated plans for the Invasion of Normandy. He was General George Marshall's chief consultant when in the Spring of 1942 he traveled to London with General Marshall and a small group of American military men to consult with the British in an effort to convince the British to support the cross channel invasion." Albert Coady Wedemeyer - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


In his biography and analysis of the war, *he devotes an entire chapter to the 'unconditional surrender' policy, saying "We annulled the prospect of winning a real victory by the call for unconditional surrender....*

Our demand for unconditional surrender naturally *increased the enemy's will to resist and forced even Hitler's worst enemies to continue fighting..." *"Wedemeyer Reports!: An objective, dispassionate examination of World War II, postwar policies, and Grand Strategy,"
by Albert C. Wedemeyer, p. 95-96.




*[The 'unconditional surrender policy] helped prolong the war in Europe *through its usefulness to German domestic propaganda that used it to encourage further resistance against the Allied armies, *and its suppressive effect on the German resistance movement *since even after a coup against Adolf Hitler:

"...those Germans — and particularly those *German generals — who might have been ready to throw Hitler over, and were able to do so, were discouraged from making the attempt by *their inability to extract from the Allies any sort of assurance that such action would improve the treatment meted out to their country."
Michael Balfour, "Another Look at 'Unconditional Surrender'",_International Affairs_(Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 46, No. 4 (Oct., 1970), pp. 719-736


Was Roosevelt stupid...???


*Unconditional surrender.....FDR's obedience to Joseph Stalin....and his greatest blunder.*



To get an idea of the cost of the extended war...*."....over one hundred thirty-five thousand American GIs died – *a startling figure today – between D day[june 6, 1944] and V-E day,[May 8, 1945]...." 
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence

Get that?

135,000 brave American boys whose lives were offered up as a gift to Stalin....to make certain that communism survived.


Based on the ration of deaths to wounded, that would suggest almost *an additional 200,000 wounded, just between Normandy and Germany's surrender.*

Totally attributed to 'unconditional surrender.'



This may be a shocking suggestion.....but maybe you should read a book.


----------



## rylah (Aug 21, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



I can post a link to "Earth is Flat"...

But that still doesn't explain how your disregard for Russians,
is in essence different from the one of Stalin?.

He at least lead them to victory,
with you it's only dishonor.

Americans didn't survive even half of what Russians went through,
and of all, you're the ones doing the chest thumping...


----------



## Litwin (Aug 21, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...







__





						A Soviet - Nazi Alliance .  The Molotov - Ribbentrop (Koba - Hitlers)  Pact
					

A Soviet - Nazi Alliance .  The Molotov- Ribbentrop (Koba - Hitlers)  Pact . great that the Marxists and Muscovites  can not hide the truth anymore , and everyone knows today who started WW2    [VIDEO]



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 21, 2020)

Litwin said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...




Well, the did descend from the same source.

A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." November 27, 1925.

Shortly thereafter the Nazis found it more useful to stress differences, and the earlier campaign posters showing similarities disappeared, posters with both the hammer and sickle and the swastika.

"Hitler often stated that he learned much from reading Marx, and the whole of National Socialism is doctrinally based on Marxism." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 21, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


Chic never even served and he/she is pissing on brave soldiers' graves


----------



## AZrailwhale (Aug 22, 2020)

rylah said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...


The Soviet people, one on one, were brave, but no braver than any other people involved in WWII.  But, the USSR was only in the war because it was invaded by a country That it voluntarily allied with to dismember and conquer Poland.  If Hitler hadn’t invaded the USSR, the Soviet people And government would have been perfectly fine with the “Hitlerite’s” war crimes and aggressive war on the west.  The Soviets were never real allies with the Wallies, they cooperated grudgingly at best and provided little or nothing to the Wallies in return for the tens of billions of dollars in food, equipment, raw industrial material and weapons that at first the UK and then the USA provided despite needing the material themselves.  The USSR never showed a shred of gratitude, but constantly demanded more.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Aug 22, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Oz and the Orchestra said:
> ...


How many Americans were shot in the aftermath of either Kasserine Pass or the Battle of the Bulge?  As far as I know, none were.  You can’t compare the records of executions between the US Army and the Red Army


----------



## AZrailwhale (Aug 22, 2020)

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Oh? You seem to forget North Africa, Sicily, and Italy. 1942 and 1943 respectively.
> ...


Rommel didn’t run out of gas, he ran out of tanks.  He wasn’t short of supplies and reinforcements because of the ostfront he was short of supplies because the Italian Navy couldn’t keep the sea lanes open from Italy to Libya.  He was short of reinforcements because they were all going to Kesselring to face the American and British forces from Torch. Neither Monty or Rommel had the logistic ability to defeat the other, both sides regularly outran their ability to supply their forces and had to halt offensives.


----------



## yidnar (Aug 22, 2020)

rylah said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


the second amendment keeps us from being human mine sweepers for the government ....


----------



## AZrailwhale (Aug 22, 2020)

harmonica said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


All four of those divisions were within a hundred miles of the invasion beaches as were a number of other first line units.  The second line units were the ones actually manning the beach fortifications.  You don’t need your best troops to hold concrete emplacements that must be taken by frontal assaults from the sea.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Aug 22, 2020)

harmonica said:


> .....the US will just ''push back'' the Russians...........................?????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> the Germans had MORE power than the US had and it was the Germans who got pushed back


Both the German and Red army were largely horse-drawn and lacked the mobility the fully mechanized US and largely mechanized British armies had.  Neither the Red or German armies had the logistical ability to make the fast, long range advances that the Wallies made.  That’s why the huge fleet of lend lease trucks were so valuable to the Red Army when it was finally able to go on the all out offensive late on the war.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




Well put.
Clearly you understand the players more than most do.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 22, 2020)

yidnar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > konradv said:
> ...




Don't you get the feeling that, under Democrats, the Constitution is honored more in the breach than in the observance?


----------



## harmonica (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > .....the US will just ''push back'' the Russians...........................?????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...


....I know all about it.....what does that have to do with the point posted


----------



## harmonica (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


.I know all about it 
what does that have to do with the Panzers not there on DDay?


----------



## Erinwltr (Aug 22, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


As always, you make no sense.  Keep posting propaganda for PUTIN.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


.....that has nothing to do with honoring brave soldiers/soldiers --like a lot of posts on a lot of subjects, most of that is babble unrelated to the topic


----------



## harmonica (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


..you, also don't know much about the military/wars/etc here's why:
..doesn't matter if they are brave or not --you should still honor them

....AND---just like in ALL countries, the soldiers did not make the political decisions!!!!!..if you don't want to honor Stalin, fine...but it wasn't the ground pounder soldiers who made the decisions/etc


----------



## harmonica (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


.....hitler/etc  didn't release them for some time --until it was too late--so they were  worthless


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 22, 2020)

Erinwltr said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> ...




Why  do you Leftists keep writing what is clearly counterintuitive?

The only party we have evidence of associating with the Kremlin, is the Democrat Party.

Here's a quid pro quo by Hussein...





Try not being so stupid.


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Von Rusntdedt (Battle of the Bulge) certainly did run out of fuel and the assault came to an abrupt halt. Doesn't matter how many tanks, reinforcements or logistical prowess you have or haven't got
if you ain't got no fuel.


----------



## harmonica (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


1. they didn't hold them!! not enough for reinforcement/Panzers
-a. second rate troops have to hold until reinforcements get there--and they didn't
2. the Panzers were too far away and not released in time to stop the Allies on the beach = like Rommel said = game over = Panzers worthless
3. some did not get there till weeks after DDay = worthless


----------



## harmonica (Aug 22, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


..you made a really goofy mistake/etc in equating politics with military 
..the soldiers did not make the decisions---Stalin, etc did 
..so, if you don't want to honor Stalin/etc fine--but honor the soldiers or shut up--you are pissing on their graves


----------



## Oz and the Orchestra (Aug 22, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Svetlana you need to quite now.
Another of your fans 'westwall', who gives all your posts the thumbs up, has completely contradicted himself and you, by saying between 7.5 & 10. million soviet troops were killed by the Nazi's and the Holocaust definitely DID take place.

As that destroys the whole premise of your thread, Time to hang your head and troddle off.

Bye bye!


----------



## westwall (Aug 22, 2020)

AZrailwhale said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> > .....the US will just ''push back'' the Russians...........................?????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ...







Yup.  We gave the Russians 600,000 trucks.  In one fell swoop,  they were mobilized.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 22, 2020)

westwall said:


> AZrailwhale said:
> 
> 
> > harmonica said:
> ...




... a tire plant, an oil refinery, pipe-fabricating works, over a million miles of copper wire, switchboard-panels, lathes and power tools, textile machinery, woodworking, typesetting, cranes hoists, derricks, air compressors, $152 million in women's 'dress goods,' 18.4 million pounds of writing paper, cigarette cases, jeweled watches, lipstick, liquor, bathtubs, and pianos.


George Kennan wrote: "there is no adequate justification for continuing a program of lavish and almost indiscriminate aid to the Soviet Union at a time when there was increasing reason to doubt whether her purposes in Eastern Europe, aside from the defeat of Germany, would be ones which we Americans could approve and sponsor." George C. Herring, "Aid to Russia," p. xvii.

 I challenge FDR apologists to explain government largesse to Soviet Russia, even superseding Allied, or even American military needs. Or American civilian needs: 217,660,666 pounds of butter shipped to the USSR during a time of strict state-side rationing. John R. Deane, "The Strange Alliance: The Story of Our Efforts at Wartime Cooperation With Russia," p.94-95.

a. "The President has directed that 'airplanes be delivered in accordance with protocol schedules by the most expeditious means.' To implement these directives, the modification, equipment and movement of Russian planes have been given first priority, even over planes for US Army Air Forces." From the diaries of Maj. George Racey Jordan, supervisory 'expediter' of Soviet Lend-Lease aid, p. 20.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 23, 2020)

August 23rd, 1939: Germany and the Soviet Union signed a nonaggression pact dividing eastern Europe into German and Soviet spheres of influence. 


This was the official announcement......they were allies long before this, both having grown from the warped mind of Karl Marx.



The major player in the Alger Hiss saga was fellow Communist, Whitaker Chambers. In his book, _Witness_, Chambers explains is disillusionment as follows. In 1938, he determined not only to break with the Communist Party, but to inform on the Party when he could. The reason was that he was informed that *Stalin was making efforts to align with Hitler, in 1939*, and “from any human point of view, the pact was evil.” 

As Hitler marched into Poland, Chambers arranged a private meeting with Adolf Berle, President Roosevelt’s assistant Sec’y of State. Chambers detailed the Communist espionage network, naming at least two dozen Soviet spies in Roosevelt’s administration, including Alger Hiss. *Berle reported this to Roosevelt, who laughed, and told Berle to go f--- himself.* (Arthur Herman, Joseph McCarthy: Reexaming the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator, p. 60) No action was taken, and in fact,* Roosevelt promoted Hiss.* 

Almost a decade later, Chambers was called before the HUAC and named Hiss as a Soviet agent. Hiss sued Chambers, at which time Chambers presented “… four notes in Alger Hiss's handwriting, sixty-five typewritten copies of State Department documents and five strips of microfilm, some of which contained photographs of State Department documents. The press came to call these the "Pumpkin Papers"(Whittaker Chambers - Wikipedia) And, of course, all doubt was removed in 1995, when the Venona Soviet cables were decrypted.


----------



## Silver Cat (Aug 24, 2020)

Does not matter should we respect Russian sacrifices in WWII or not. The practical question is simple - are they "ready to repeat" or it is a mere bluff? Another question - are we ready to lose twenty millions of Americans to win the war against China?


----------



## AZrailwhale (Aug 26, 2020)

Oz and the Orchestra said:


> AZrailwhale said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


The Germans never had the supplies for Watch on the Rhine.  They were hoping to capture allied supplies and their planning expected the Americans and British to fold like the French and British did when the Germans invaded through the Ardennes in 1940.  The whole operation was one of Hitler’s wild ideas expecting his enemies to behave in the manner most advantageous to Germany.


----------



## Quasar44 (Aug 27, 2020)

It was the Russian Army that defeated the far more powerful Germans 
 Russia won ..not USA 
USA beat the Japs


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 27, 2020)

Quasar44 said:


> It was the Russian Army that defeated the far more powerful Germans
> Russia won ..not USA
> USA beat the Japs





Quasar44 said:


> It was the Russian Army that defeated the far more powerful Germans
> Russia won ..not USA
> USA beat the Japs




Have you ever read a book?

FDR turned over control of United States troops and material to Stalin.

Stalin dictated where the invasion of Europe would be, using American troops, and saving this Red Army for occupation after America defeated Germany.
And Stalin demanded 'unconditional surrender' costing thousands of US lives.


And....you should find out the vast amount of material given to Stalin in Lend Lease.



Really.


----------



## Quasar44 (Aug 27, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> Quasar44 said:
> 
> 
> > It was the Russian Army that defeated the far more powerful Germans
> ...



USA turned over American troops to Stalin lol
What an ignoramus, you’re


----------



## PoliticalChic (Aug 27, 2020)

Quasar44 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Quasar44 said:
> ...





OK, moron....here comes an education: take notes.



*Stalin was adamant about it forming via the northwestern edge of the continent rather than abide by Churchill's wish, Italy.


a. Consider the analysis of NYTimes Russia expert, Edwin James:*
" ALLIED FRONT IN ITALY NOT SO FAR FROM REICH; In Other Words, It Is Just as Close to Germany From Any Peninsula Point As It Is From Dnieper THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE"
*By EDWIN L. JAMES
September 12, 1943
Pay Articles from September 1943 Part 4 - Site Map - The New York Times*
So....why did Stalin insist on the Allies opening the front at Normandy rather than the bases already conquered in Italy?

Here's why: he wanted the Red Army to cut Europe in half , as he would be able to occupy same.

And Roosevelt agreed with him...*.Roosevelt wanted to give all of Eastern Europe over to this homicidal maniac who slaughtered and oppressed millions!*



b.Don't believe that that was the reason for Stalin's insistence on the "second front" being as far west as possible?

"Any time or any place where German forces are engaged by the American and the British represents good luck for Stalin. That is true because* Hitler's strength is taxed just as much by fighting to the south as it would be fighting to the west."*
Diana West, "American Betrayal," p. 266.
How can one argue with that?

Well.....only if "taxing Hitler's strength" wasn't the aim....*.gaining the territory of central Europe for the Red Army was.*



c. 'To withdraw from the European continent [Italy] to re-invade the European continent was simply crazy.'
Dunn, "Caught Between Roosevelt and Stalin," p.195-196
Yet, Roosevelt sided with Stalin over Churchill, and over General Mark Clark, commander of the 5th US Army, in Italy.
Why?



Still care to deny that Stalin was in charge of Roosevelt's war efforts?
...and Stalin would get his way down to the last American casualty?

In the effort to install world-wide communism, any loss to either America, or to Germany, was a gain for Stalin.

Thank you, Franklin Roosevelt


----------



## yidnar (Aug 30, 2020)

PoliticalChic said:


> yidnar said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


yes.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 15, 2021)

Correll said:


> what do you think of a nation that only turned on their allies the nazis, when the nazis invaded their country?


The Soviets did nothing for the Western Allies. Stalin regarded the Western Allies as much enemies as he did the Nazis.  Everyone involved were the class enemies of the Soviets.  

Before Hitler turned on Stalin, Stalin planned to get rich selling the Germans resources while waiting for the capitalists to weaken each other for easy overthrow or capture by communists.  Once Stalin was forced into the war by Hitler’s betrayal, he spent the next four years extorting money and supplies from the Western Allies while treating their active personnel and internees as prisoners.
He stole western tech, to the point of making direct copies of the three B-29s that he interned while treating their crews like prisoners instead of returning, at least, the crews to US forces.  Calling the USSR an ally is really stretching things.  Japan was more of a ally to Germany than the USSR was to the Western Allies.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 15, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ..you can say same the same thing about Churchill/Roosevelt/Allied Generals/etc
> Rapido River
> Market Garden
> Battle of the Bulge
> ...


Show me one battle where Allied troops were forced to advance by “friendly” tanks and machine guns pointed at their backs.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 15, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Once again, our resident Nazi Political Chic advocates we should have let the Nazis win.


The Soviets were our enemies as much as the Germans were.  So yes we should have let them fight and weaken each other and then dictated terms to the exhausted “victor”.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 15, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> The Soviets did nothing for the Western Allies. Stalin regarded the Western Allies as much enemies as he did the Nazis.  Everyone involved were the class enemies of the Soviets.
> 
> Before Hitler turned on Stalin, Stalin planned to get rich selling the Germans resources while waiting for the capitalists to weaken each other for easy overthrow or capture by communists.  Once Stalin was forced into the war by Hitler’s betrayal, he spent the next four years extorting money and supplies from the Western Allies while treating their active personnel and internees as prisoners.
> He stole western tech, to the point of making direct copies of the three B-29s that he interned while treating their crews like prisoners instead of returning, at least, the crews to US forces.  Calling the USSR an ally is really stretching things.  Japan was more of a ally to Germany than the USSR was to the Western Allies.


..the Russians are the ones who gave hitler  the biggest defeats/etc  ......22 June 1941 was the day that determined the outcome of the war ....yes, they were our Allies


----------



## harmonica (Oct 15, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> Show me one battle where Allied troops were forced to advance by “friendly” tanks and machine guns pointed at their backs.


that in no way comes close to refuting my point


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 15, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ..the Russians are the ones who gave hitler  the biggest defeats/etc  ......22 June 1941 was the day that determined the outcome of the war ....yes, they were our Allies


The Soviets,not the Russians, had no choice.  Hitler planned to destroy them.  Even if they had stayed “neutral” just selling the Germans resources, the Western Allies would have still beaten Germany, and withoutthe horrible losses the Soviets suffered.  Leaving the Soviets out of the equation, Germany was against the two largest economies on the planet.  It would have taken longer, but the end would have been the same.  Clouds of RAF and USAAF fighters and bombers in total control of the air and the vaunted German army starving with no fuel or munitions to fight.  More men, horses, tanks and trucks just means a larger number of starving out of fuel troops eating their millions of draft horses to survive.  Throughout the war, most Getmrman combat formations depended on horse drawn wagons for both mobility and supplies.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 15, 2021)

harmonica said:


> that in no way comes close to refuting my point


It makes the point that Allied losses were the result of bad decisions and Soviet losses were deliberate policy of the state.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 15, 2021)

Patton, correctly, called the ending disposition of WWII a huge strategic failure for the USA and Brits leaving great European Capitals in the hands of the descendants of Genghis Khan

Our USMB Progressives, never having lived under Communism or even knowing how Communism operates, are quick to defend FDR's Master, Uncle Joe


----------



## Unkotare (Oct 15, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ..the Russians are the ones who gave hitler  the biggest defeats/etc  ......22 June 1941 was the day that determined the outcome of the war ....yes, they were our Allies


You fucking commie sympathizer.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

Unkotare said:


> You fucking commie sympathizer.


hitler and stalin were ok, they just went a little too far


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Oct 16, 2021)

Anyone who wants to grasp just how vicious, cruel, and lawless the Soviets were during World War II, and how shamefully FDR kowtowed to them, should read historian Sean McMeekin's new book Stalin's War: A New History of World War II.

Stalin made Hitler look like an amateur when it came to committing mass murder and imposing tyranny. When the Soviet invaded and captured Poland, the Poles quickly discovered that Soviet rule was far worse than German rule.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale
both sides made bad decisions/etc.....war is not like making a sandwich...there is much to it......a LOT of it [ war/battles ] has to do with LOGISTICS
......Rapido is a perfect example of an idiot American general forcing troops into a kill zone .....
......plain and simple, the Allied leaders were not GODs who were PERFECT


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> The Soviets did nothing for the Western Allies. Stalin regarded the Western Allies as much enemies as he did the Nazis.  Everyone involved were the class enemies of the Soviets.
> 
> Before Hitler turned on Stalin, Stalin planned to get rich selling the Germans resources while waiting for the capitalists to weaken each other for easy overthrow or capture by communists.  Once Stalin was forced into the war by Hitler’s betrayal, he spent the next four years extorting money and supplies from the Western Allies while treating their active personnel and internees as prisoners.
> He stole western tech, to the point of making direct copies of the three B-29s that he interned while treating their crews like prisoners instead of returning, at least, the crews to US forces.  Calling the USSR an ally is really stretching things.  Japan was more of a ally to Germany than the USSR was to the Western Allies.


The Soviets did most of the fighting and dying against the Germans while the other allies procrastinated over starting a new front 
By D Day, the Soviets already had the Nazis on the run


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> The Soviets did most of the fighting and dying against the Germans while the other allies procrastinated over starting a new front
> By D Day, the Soviets already had the Nazis on the run


..the other fronts were very tiny compared to the OstFront


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> The Soviets,not the Russians, had no choice.  Hitler planned to destroy them.  Even if they had stayed “neutral” just selling the Germans resources, the Western Allies would have still beaten Germany, and withoutthe horrible losses the Soviets suffered.  Leaving the Soviets out of the equation, Germany was against the two largest economies on the planet.  It would have taken longer, but the end would have been the same.  Clouds of RAF and USAAF fighters and bombers in total control of the air and the vaunted German army starving with no fuel or munitions to fight.  More men, horses, tanks and trucks just means a larger number of starving out of fuel troops eating their millions of draft horses to survive.  Throughout the war, most Getmrman combat formations depended on horse drawn wagons for both mobility and supplies.


It is unlikely the West would have defeated the Germans without the Soviets engaging the bulk of their top Divisions

While the Soviets were willing to suffer mass casualties in defending their homeland, it is unlikely the other allies would be willing to sacrifice millions to liberate France, Belgium, Norway and the Netherlands
Germany would have offered a truce and we would have accepted


----------



## Unkotare (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> hitler and stalin were ok, they just went a little too far


They were fucking scum, like you.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

Unkotare said:


> They were fucking scum, like you.


hahahahHAHHAHAHAHAHAH--good laughs on Saturday --mucho thanks


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> The Soviets did nothing for the Western Allies. Stalin regarded the Western Allies as much enemies as he did the Nazis.  Everyone involved were the class enemies of the Soviets.
> 
> Before Hitler turned on Stalin, Stalin planned to get rich selling the Germans resources while waiting for the capitalists to weaken each other for easy overthrow or capture by communists.  Once Stalin was forced into the war by Hitler’s betrayal, he spent the next four years extorting money and supplies from the Western Allies while treating their active personnel and internees as prisoners.
> He stole western tech, to the point of making direct copies of the three B-29s that he interned while treating their crews like prisoners instead of returning, at least, the crews to US forces.  Calling the USSR an ally is really stretching things.  Japan was more of a ally to Germany than the USSR was to the Western Allies.



Agreed.  THe way that FDR trusted that commie, were fucking retarded.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> Agreed.  THe way that FDR trusted that commie, were fucking retarded.


FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying while he procrastinated on an invasion 

Saved 100,000 US lives or more


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> FDR got Stalin to do most of the fighting and dying while he procrastinated on an invasion
> 
> Saved 100,000 US lives or more




He should not have done Lend Lease to the Soviets, he should not have allowed pro-soviet propaganda in the US, and he should not have gone to Yalta, he was too old and sick to negotiate. 

Hell, he should not have run for his final term.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> He should not have done Lend Lease to the Soviets, he should not have allowed pro-soviet propaganda in the US, and he should not have gone to Yalta, he was too old and sick to negotiate.
> 
> Hell, he should not have run for his final term.


We give you equipment, you fight and die with it so we don’t have to
Good deal for us

In Yalta, FDR gave Stalin land he had already captured. We were not going to dislodge the Soviet forces


----------



## Unkotare (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> He should not have done Lend Lease to the Soviets, he should not have allowed pro-soviet propaganda in the US, and he should not have gone to Yalta, he was too old and sick to negotiate.
> 
> Hell, he should not have run for his final term.


He shouldn't have run for his FIRST term.


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> We give you equipment, you fight and die with it so we don’t have to
> Good deal for us
> 
> In Yalta, FDR gave Stalin land he had already captured. We were not going to dislodge the Soviet forces




They could have done their dying closer to Moscow. The Cold War would have bene much less scary if the Iron Curtain was the Polish Russian border instead of in the middle of Germany.


NOt to mention generations of whole nations, avoiding totalitarian oppression and mass murder.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> We give you equipment, you fight and die with it so we don’t have to
> Good deal for us
> 
> In Yalta, FDR gave Stalin land he had already captured. We were not going to dislodge the Soviet forces


exactly


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> They could have done their dying closer to Moscow. The Cold War would have bene much less scary if the Iron Curtain was the Polish Russian border instead of in the middle of Germany.
> 
> 
> NOt to mention generations of whole nations, avoiding totalitarian oppression and mass murder.


Well, they did
Stalingrad and Leningrad also

But once they defeated the Germans there, they had no choice but to fall back

Hitler was terrified of what the Russians would do. That is why most of his forces were on the Eastern Front

If he put those Divisions in the West, we never would have dislodged them


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> They could have done their dying closer to Moscow. The Cold War would have bene much less scary if the Iron Curtain was the Polish Russian border instead of in the middle of Germany.
> 
> 
> NOt to mention generations of whole nations, avoiding totalitarian oppression and mass murder.


..we had a hard enough time getting where we did on the WestFront
...please detail how the Cold War would've been '''*MUCH* less scary'''


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Well, they did
> Stalingrad and Leningrad also
> 
> But once they defeated the Germans there, they had no choice but to fall back
> ...


..if it wasn't for hitler putting his nose into it, it would've been even harder without those extra forces


----------



## Circe (Oct 16, 2021)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


All wrong. I see you have never read Churchill on WWII or any books about WWII.

The Soviet Union soaking up German soldiers' lives on the Eastern Front is probably why we, the allies, won WWII. And the allies sure knew this at the time and gave every assistance they could to Russia --- supplies, arms, and not as much as Stalin begged for, opening other fronts in the war.


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Well, they did
> Stalingrad and Leningrad also
> 
> But once they defeated the Germans there, they had no choice but to fall back
> ...




So, no lend lease, after they win those battles, they don't have the trucks to advance or advance much slower.


----------



## Circe (Oct 16, 2021)

Oh, man, I got caught again ----- this is one of those antique threads. Why did the board start putting them up? I hate that.


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ..we had a hard enough time getting where we did on the WestFront
> ...please detail how the Cold War would've been '''*MUCH* less scary'''




if the soviets had their tanks sitting in Russia instead of the middle of Germany, that would be less scary.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> if the soviets had their tanks sitting in Russia instead of the middle of Germany, that would be less scary.


...doesn't matter where they are-----they still have bombers and nukes.....they would still be a threat ...they OWNED Poland!!!  they'd go right through it


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ...doesn't matter where they are-----they still have bombers and nukes.....they would still be a threat ...they OWNED Poland!!!  they'd go right through it




This is based on one of my gripes about FDR, that he was way to friendly with the Soviet Union and Stalin. 

I was discussing a way that WWII could have been handled better with regards to the post war situation.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ..we had a hard enough time getting where we did on the WestFront
> ...please detail how the Cold War would've been '''*MUCH* less scary'''


If he thinks the Cold War was scary, imagine the Cold War we would have had with Nazi Germany


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> This is based on one of my gripes about FDR, that he was way to friendly with the Soviet Union and Stalin.
> 
> I was discussing a way that WWII could have been handled better with regards to the post war situation.


What did FDR give the Soviets that you disagree with?


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> This is based on one of my gripes about FDR, that he was way to friendly with the Soviet Union and Stalin.
> 
> I was discussing a way that WWII could have been handled better with regards to the post war situation.


THAT [ the war and post- war ] is/was *VERY* complicated......there was so much politics in it .....one of the reasons is because the Russians were not just going to let the other Allies do whatever they wanted--ESPECIALLY since the Russians *bore the brunt* of the death and destruction .....and the US could not bully them with the Atomic bomb
...AND, they knew the other Allies were not '''friendly'''
....no, the handling of the post-war was like the war---NOT a movie/NOT a board game/etc -very complicated ...and all the countries had MANY problems of their own--politically and logistically ......that's why there were so many civil wars after the war--Greece/Balkans/Korea/Vietnam/etc....much unrest without civil wars
WW2 was the most destructive and CONSTRUCTIVE war----many new nations and politics after the war


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> if the soviets had their tanks sitting in Russia instead of the middle of Germany, that would be less scary.


The Soviets had to fight for every inch of land on the way to Germany


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> What did FDR give the Soviets that you disagree with?




Lend lease and Eastern Europe.


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> THAT [ the war and post- war ] is/was *VERY* complicated......there was so much politics in it .....one of the reasons is because the Russians were not just going to let the other Allies do whatever they wanted--ESPECIALLY since the Russians *bore the brunt* of the death and destruction .....and the US could not bully them with the Atomic bomb
> ...AND, they knew the other Allies were not '''friendly'''
> ....no, the handling of the post-war was like the war---NOT a movie/NOT a board game/etc -very complicated ...and all the countries had MANY problems of their own--politically and logistically ......that's why there were so many civil wars after the war--Greece/Balkans/Korea/Vietnam/etc....much unrest without civil wars
> WW2 was the most destructive and CONSTRUCTIVE war----many new nations and politics after the war




I know. I still think that FDR still was too sympathetic to Stalin and the Soviet Union and did not give enough, if any consideration to the post war situation.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> They could have done their dying closer to Moscow. The Cold War would have bene much less scary if the Iron Curtain was the Polish Russian border instead of in the middle of Germany.
> 
> 
> NOt to mention generations of whole nations, avoiding totalitarian oppression and mass murder.


hey--hey --there is no way the Allies were going to get to the Polish border before the Russians........as I stated, it was hard enough to get where we did


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> Lend lease and Eastern Europe.


Lend Lease worked
It allowed the Soviets to fight the Germans while we wouldn’t 
If the Soviets did not occupy Eastern Europe, the Nazis would have

Choose your poison


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> I know. I still think that FDR still was too sympathetic to Stalin and the Soviet Union and did not give enough, if any consideration to the post war situation.


the Russians weren't going to give it up even if FDR wanted it


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> The Soviets had to fight for every inch of land on the way to Germany




Yep. And if they did not have so much support from US, they would have gotten less of that land. 


Would you have LIKED to see a free Eastern Europe during the 50s, 60s, 70s, and the 80s?


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> Yep. And if they did not have so much support from US, they would have gotten less of that land.
> 
> 
> Would you have LIKED to see a free Eastern Europe during the 50s, 60s, 70s, and the 80s?


What makes you think Eastern Europe would be free?

If the Soviets did not occupy it, the Nazis would have


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> hey--hey --there is no way the Allies were going to get to the Polish border before the Russians........as I stated, it was hard enough to get where we did




Let the german generals know that if Hitler fell down a flight of stairs, that a negotiated peace where they don't all get hung, is a possibility and who knows what might happen.


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Lend Lease worked
> It allowed the Soviets to fight the Germans while we wouldn’t
> If the Soviets did not occupy Eastern Europe, the Nazis would have
> 
> Choose your poison




Sure. IF all you are thinking of, is the immediate situation. A good leader thinks ahead.


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> the Russians weren't going to give it up even if FDR wanted it




Perhaps. He should have tried.


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> What makes you think Eastern Europe would be free?
> 
> If the Soviets did not occupy it, the Nazis would have




Oh? You  think the Nazis would have won WWII without US giving lend lease to the soviets?

Interesting. Most lefties insist that the soviets would have won regardless.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> Sure. IF all you are thinking of, is the immediate situation. A good leader thinks ahead.


FDR did think ahead
Nazi Germany and Japan were defeated
The world was better off

How far was FDR thinking ahead when he approved the Manhattan Project? A major investment in resources and Scientific Personnel with no guarantee of success


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> Oh? You  think the Nazis would have won WWII without US giving lend lease to the soviets?
> 
> Interesting. Most lefties insist that the soviets would have won regardless.



Yes
The Soviets did the bulk of the fighting and dying against the Nazis. The American public would not have approved of the same sacrifice


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> FDR did think ahead
> Nazi Germany and Japan were defeated
> The world was better off
> 
> How far was FDR thinking ahead when he approved the Manhattan Project? A major investment in resources and Scientific Personnel with no guarantee of success




All of that was dealing with immediate situation with no thought to the long term.


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Yes
> The Soviets did the bulk of the fighting and dying against the Nazis. The American public would not have approved of the same sacrifice




What do you imagine? THe nazis take Moscow and the Russians surrender and start working to support the nazi war machine?


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> All of that was dealing with immediate situation with no thought to the long term.


FDR did look long term

An elimination of Nazi Germany and Japan
To do that, he needed the help of the Soviets

Keep in mind it was not FDRs war
He needed consensus of the Brits and Soviets who also had a dog in the fight


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> What do you imagine? THe nazis take Moscow and the Russians surrender and start working to support the nazi war machine?



Since we are engaging in revisionist history…
Two possible alternate outcomes

Germany defeats the Soviets and occupies USSR
They fight to a stalemate and Germany occupies Eastern Europe

Either outcome is not preferable to the Soviets defeating the Nazis


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> FDR did look long term
> 
> An elimination of Nazi Germany and Japan
> To do that, he needed the help of the Soviets
> ...




YOu are in a war. Thinking of hte war, is short term. Thinking of the post war situation is long term. 


I understand that Churchill and Stalin had...power too, and had to be taken seriously.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> YOu are in a war. Thinking of hte war, is short term. Thinking of the post war situation is long term.
> 
> 
> I understand that Churchill and Stalin had...power too, and had to be taken seriously.


It does look at the postwar situation

A situation where we preferred the Soviets to the Nazis
A good decision on out part


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> It does look at the postwar situation
> 
> A situation where we preferred the Soviets to the Nazis
> A good decision on out part




Short term thinking.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> Short term thinking.


Under what scenario do you have us fighting on the Western Front and the Soviets fighting on the Eastern Front and us ending up with all the territory on the Eastern Front?


----------



## Correll (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Under what scenario do you have us fighting on the Western Front and the Soviets fighting on the Eastern Front and us ending up with all the territory on the Eastern Front?




One where we get a surrender that includes nazi war crime trials and US taking over all occupied lands from the Germans.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

Correll said:


> One where we get a surrender that includes nazi war crime trials and US taking over all occupied lands from the Germans.


Why would the Nazis surrender when their entire Army is still active on the Eastern Front?


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

Exa


rightwinger said:


> Stalin BEGGED FDR to open a second front starting in 1942. Instead, FDR held off invasion till June 1944. In that time, Stalin killed millions of German troops and sacrificed tens of millions of his own people.
> 
> Good deal for FDR, bad deal for Stalin.
> 
> What “next big conflict” are you talking about?






rightwinger said:


> Exactly how was the US supposed to open a second front in 1942?  Unlike Stalin, FDR couldn’t send his troops walking to fight the Germans.  Plus we did open a second front in Africa,it was called Operation Torch and was far larger than any amphibious operation Stalin even planned.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Good example
> 
> Could Patton and Montgomery have defeated Rommel if Rommel was fully supplied?  Germany diverted his support to Russia and Yugoslavia.
> Rommel didn’t lose, he ran out of gas.
> ...


Yes they could have.  Rommel faced the same problem the Allies faced in Torch.  His supplies had to come by water.  No matter how many millions of tons of supplies Hitler sent for North Africa, the Italians And Germans were limited to the Few tens of thousands of tons they could transport across the Med.
Rommel not only ran out of gas, he ran out of tanks and trucks as well because he depended on Italian merchant ships for resupply and Italy didn’t have all that many ships.  Rommel was only able to attack as well as he did because he see captured British trucks, tanks, artillery, food and fuel to support his forces.  The 8th Army and Afrika Korps fought a see saw war sued upon supply availability.  There is a point where trucks need more fuel than they can carry and that’s as far as the Brits and Germans were able to go.  The US changed that, it funneled endless amounts of weapons, fuel and food to the Brits, then invaded in Rommel’s rear forcing him to retreat from North Africa entirely.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> 1. they didn't need the industrial might of the US--Russia was too big to conquer
> 2. most of the fighting was done on the Ost Front--without it, the Western Front would've had a lot more dead--a lot more time getting the Germany


If the Germans had even half a brain, they could have easily defeated Stalin and the communists.  All they had to do was support the various separatist movments in the republics.  Everybody hated Stalin and the communists, the Ukrainian people welcomed the Germans as liberators until the SS got there and started murdering civilians.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> you are out of your mind if you think we could beat Russia
> ..the Germans had airpower also
> ...AND  Germany was fighting on TWO fronts--against the 2 largest countries
> ..the US is not going to beat Russia
> ...


The Luftwaffe was a joke compared to the USAAF.  We defeated them over their own airfields in their own radar coverage.  The Luftwaffe did the same to the Red Airforce.  The Soviets were unable to gain even air parity over Eastern Front battlefields until the USAAF gutted the Luftwaffe’s fighter strength.  If the US had gone to war with the USSR, it wouldn’t only have more fighters and bombers by a huge margin, but far better ones as well. The Soviets would have been further handicapped by having to use low octane gas for aviation fuel as their entire supply of the octane boosters came from the US as well as a large percentage of their aviation fuel as well.  The Soviets would have had a short window of relative equality in mobility until the lend lease supplies ran out and the poorly maintained American Studebaker trucks the Red Army depended on began to breakdown in large numbers.  Remember, the instant combat with Soviet forces starts, all lend lease stops and the Soviets are only left with the small amounts they have stockpiled.  In 1945, the Soviets couldn’t even feed their own army, let along their civilians.  Starvation and disease would quickly wreck the Soviet Union allowing the Western Allies to walk in and pick up the pieces just as they did in Germany.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> exactly---hahahahahah--then why is transportation so important ?


You really are an idiot,  transportation and logistics are everything in modern warfare.  Hurtgen Forest a small defensive battle that was bungled by the US commander.  As for the Bilge, the Germans had to move everything by night, then wait for a long string of bad weather to ground Allied TACAIR and still failed to achieve a single one of their objectives.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> If the Germans had even half a brain, they could have easily defeated Stalin and the communists.  All they had to do was support the various separatist movments in the republics.  Everybody hated Stalin and the communists, the Ukrainian people welcomed the Germans as liberators until the SS got there and started murdering civilians.


In theory, yes
In practice no because Hitler considered them to be subhuman


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

JohnHI said:


> Thank you for your words! I knew some people from russia\SU they told me " if you want to know little bit more about Soviet Union people bravery look at the Siege of Leningrad". Really,do you think civil people were not surrender to the nazis for 2 years and 4 months only because they fear to be shot by Stalin? And yes Soviets did shot their own, but as far as I know, they did this only in case of soldiers leaving field of battle without an order.


All the siege of Leningrad accomplished was to tie up some third line Axis troops from Romania and places like that and starve millions of Soviet citizens to death.  The citizens of Leningrad were no more brave than those of London.  They endured hardship because Stalin couldn’t be bothered to evacuate them during the long months Lake Ladoga was frozen.  He brought troops and munitions in instead of taking the civilians out.  It was all for propaganda.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> The Luftwaffe was a joke compared to the USAAF.  We defeated them over their own airfields in their own radar coverage.  The Luftwaffe did the same to the Red Airforce.  The Soviets were unable to gain even air parity over Eastern Front battlefields until the USAAF gutted the Luftwaffe’s fighter strength.  If the US had gone to war with the USSR, it wouldn’t only have more fighters and bombers by a huge margin, but far better ones as well. The Soviets would have been further handicapped by having to use low octane gas for aviation fuel as their entire supply of the octane boosters came from the US as well as a large percentage of their aviation fuel as well.  The Soviets would have had a short window of relative equality in mobility until the lend lease supplies ran out and the poorly maintained American Studebaker trucks the Red Army depended on began to breakdown in large numbers.  Remember, the instant combat with Soviet forces starts, all lend lease stops and the Soviets are only left with the small amounts they have stockpiled.  In 1945, the Soviets couldn’t even feed their own army, let along their civilians.  Starvation and disease would quickly wreck the Soviet Union allowing the Western Allies to walk in and pick up the pieces just as they did in Germany.


You underestimate the Soviet forces
They had superior tanks to the US Shermans and were skilled at tank warfare. 
They also had the advantage of fighting on their home turf. An advantage that defeated the Germans. The Soviet forces would have been willing to lose hundreds of thousands. Something the US public would not have tolerated in invading a former ally


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> You really are an idiot,  transportation and logistics are everything in modern warfare.  Hurtgen Forest a small defensive battle that was bungled by the US commander.  As for the Bilge, the Germans had to move everything by night, then wait for a long string of bad weather to ground Allied TACAIR and still failed to achieve a single one of their objectives.


You really are an idiot,HAHAHAHHAHAAHAH--you fkd up----I said the Germans did well at the Hurtgen Forest!!!  HAHAHAHAHAH....
....they [ Germans ] didn't need massive transportation at the Hurtgen 
....o O!!!!! so the Germans didn't win the Hurtgen battle, the US lost it!!!! HAHAHAH = bullshit


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> You underestimate the Soviet forces
> They had superior tanks to the US Shermans and were skilled at tank warfare.
> They also had the advantage of fighting on their home turf. An advantage that defeated the Germans. The Soviet forces would have been willing to lose hundreds of thousands. Something the US public would not have tolerated in invading a former ally


the US was not going to beat the Russian army 
remember, the US had FULL air and naval supremacy in Vietnam, but still did npt win


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> so, I ask you, your NYT buddy wants to let Germany  sink our ships and we do nothing.............you AGREE with that?


There’s a big difference between fighting the Germans and supporting the Soviets.  
as for the Germans sinking our ships, if we had been behaving like a proper neutral country the Germans would have had no reason to sink our ships.  FDR had the USN escorting British convoys halfway across the Atlantic because the R.N. lacked the escorts.  FDR was waging an undeclared war against Germany in violation of nternational law.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> If the Germans had even half a brain, they could have easily defeated Stalin and the communists.  All they had to do was support the various separatist movments in the republics.  Everybody hated Stalin and the communists, the Ukrainian people welcomed the Germans as liberators until the SS got there and started murdering civilians.


the Germans are not defeating Russia at all ...too big---too much population ......
..even with TOTAL air and naval supremacy [ including massive aircraft carriers/etc ] the US could not defeat China or NVietnam


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> You underestimate the Soviet forces
> They had superior tanks to the US Shermans and were skilled at tank warfare.
> They also had the advantage of fighting on their home turf. An advantage that defeated the Germans. The Soviet forces would have been willing to lose hundreds of thousands. Something the US public would not have tolerated in invading a former ally


.....AND MacArthur really fkd up in  Korea....one example was that  he said our *airpower *will stop the Chinese....well, it did not---the Chinese gave everyone an ass whoopin, except the USMC ...they kicked a whole corps off the peninsula..they did kick the USMC off the peninsula, but the USMC gave them heavy casualties 
AND, that's with USMC air which had the premier air support force 
...so airpower was limited, big time...they didn't have smart weapons/etc back then


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> .I know all about it
> what does that have to do with the Panzers not there on DDay?


The Panzers were there.  They were placed behind the beaches because they were a MOBILE reserve intended to repulse landings at any number of places.  It was a bad judgement by Rommel under pressure of Hitler.  But to excuse Rommel, he had never fought under a sky totally controlled by the allies or within bombardment range of a hostile ocean.  If he had placed the Panzers near the beaches, they would have been destroyed by naval gunfire as happened in the counterattacks at Anzio.  By holding them further back, they were destroyed by air attacks.  As I recall, Hitlerjugend lost over fifty percent of its strength trying to move to the beaches to launch their counter attack in Normandy.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ..you, also don't know much about the military/wars/etc here's why:
> ..doesn't matter if they are brave or not --you should still honor them
> 
> ....AND---just like in ALL countries, the soldiers did not make the political decisions!!!!!..if you don't want to honor Stalin, fine...but it wasn't the ground pounder soldiers who made the decisions/etc


I don’t honor soldiers who fought for evil countries.  I can respect their sense of duty and even their bravery, but honoring them is a different matter.  YOU may honor the NKVD and Waffen SS if you want, but I won’t.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> I don’t honor soldiers who fought for evil countries.  I can respect their sense of duty and even their bravery, but honoring them is a different matter.  YOU may honor the NKVD and Waffen SS if you want, but I won’t.


..I honor all soldiers that do not commit war crimes ...they've done nothing wrong......you, obviously, have never served


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> I don’t honor soldiers who fought for evil countries.  I can respect their sense of duty and even their bravery, but honoring them is a different matter.  YOU may honor the NKVD and Waffen SS if you want, but I won’t.


..the US was wrong to fight in Vietnam...war crimes were committed ....so, what about all the US Nam vets? ..you can say the US is an evil country for Vietnam/PG2/etc...
AND----AND---AND the Iranian OVERTHROW of an ELECTED official!! and the overthrow of the Guatemalian government !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  so, the US was UNDENIABLY evil


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> The Panzers were there.  They were placed behind the beaches because they were a MOBILE reserve intended to repulse landings at any number of places.  It was a bad judgement by Rommel under pressure of Hitler.  But to excuse Rommel, he had never fought under a sky totally controlled by the allies or within bombardment range of a hostile ocean.  If he had placed the Panzers near the beaches, they would have been destroyed by naval gunfire as happened in the counterattacks at Anzio.  By holding them further back, they were destroyed by air attacks.  As I recall, Hitlerjugend lost over fifty percent of its strength trying to move to the beaches to launch their counter attack in Normandy.


jesus christ I posted that on 22Aug !!!!


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Under what scenario do you have us fighting on the Western Front and the Soviets fighting on the Eastern Front and us ending up with all the territory on the Eastern Front?


Without lendlease from the US and UK the Eastern Front would have been North Africa writ large.  The Germans would attack driving the Soviets back on their supply bases and overextending the German supply lines.  Then the Soviets would counterattack driving the Geamans back on their supply bases overextending the Soviet’s supply lines.  Then the Germans counter-counterattack driving the Soviets back.  Both armies were largely horse drawn, neither had a real logistics advantage without western support.  The result would be a long, drawn out war of attrition that the Soviets would eventually win by a Pyrrhic victory Leaving them too few men to take advantage of.  In the meantime the western war proceeds the same, or even better with the WAllies occupying Germany and liberating Eastern And Western Europe to return to free local rule.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> Without lendlease from the US and UK the Eastern Front would have been North Africa writ large.  The Germans would attack driving the Soviets back on their supply bases and overextending the German supply lines.  Then the Soviets would counterattack driving the Geamans back on their supply bases overextending the Soviet’s supply lines.  Then the Germans counter-counterattack driving the Soviets back.  Both armies were largely horse drawn, neither had a real logistics advantage without western support.  The result would be a long, drawn out war of attrition that the Soviets would eventually win by a Pyrrhic victory Leaving them too few men to take advantage of.  In the meantime the western war proceeds the same, or even better with the WAllies occupying Germany and liberating Eastern And Western Europe to return to free local rule.


Stalemate that would result in the Soviets and Germans controlling Eastern Europe and Ukraine. 
Would not have made them Western Democracies 
The US invading Western Europe and continuing through Germany into Poland and the Ukraine was not going to happen 

The American public would not have tolerated the additional losses from fighting Germany then the Soviet forces


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> Without lendlease from the US and UK the Eastern Front would have been North Africa writ large.  The Germans would attack driving the Soviets back on their supply bases and overextending the German supply lines.  Then the Soviets would counterattack driving the Geamans back on their supply bases overextending the Soviet’s supply lines.  Then the Germans counter-counterattack driving the Soviets back.  Both armies were largely horse drawn, neither had a real logistics advantage without western support.  The result would be a long, drawn out war of attrition that the Soviets would eventually win by a Pyrrhic victory Leaving them too few men to take advantage of.  In the meantime the western war proceeds the same, or even better with the WAllies occupying Germany and liberating Eastern And Western Europe to return to free local rule.


....again, that's a lot of speculating/what ifs/etc  = opinion only = no proof/etc = wrong  ....come on over to WW2Forums if you want to discuss in detail .......


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> You underestimate the Soviet forces
> They had superior tanks to the US Shermans and were skilled at tank warfare.
> They also had the advantage of fighting on their home turf. An advantage that defeated the Germans. The Soviet forces would have been willing to lose hundreds of thousands. Something the US public would not have tolerated in invading a former ally


No they didn’t.  The only thing about the T-34 that was superior to the Sherman was that it had lower ground pressure until the HVSS suspension was added to the Sherman.  The Sherman’s 75mm gun had almost identical performance to the T-34s 76mm gun and the Sherman’s 76mm gun was as good as the T-34’s 85mm gun with regular ammo and superior to it with the late war HVAP ammo.  The various KV and JS heavies were slow, unreliable and maintenance hogs useful only for frontal assaults on fortified positions or last ditch stands.  The Soviets were never skilled at armored warfare, they were skilled at using a their armor as a expendable club to overwhelm their opponents,


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Stalemate that would result in the Soviets and Germans controlling Eastern Europe and Ukraine.
> Would not have made them Western Democracies
> The US invading Western Europe and continuing through Germany into Poland and the Ukraine was not going to happen
> 
> The American public would not have tolerated the additional losses from fighting Germany then the Soviet forces


JESUS CHRIST--again, these people think it's a* board game* where you move pieces on a game board !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  typical
.....again--the HUGE issue is logistics and distances to travel!!!!!!   = almost impossible 
and, for AZ --remember = the longer your  distance travel/''conquered'':
needs MORE logistics EXPONENTIALLY 
AND makes you WEAKER....
= the longer your supply lines are and the more territory you ''conquer'' the more weaker 
AND the more transportation/etc needed
etc


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> Without lendlease from the US and UK the Eastern Front would have been North Africa writ large.  The Germans would attack driving the Soviets back on their supply bases and overextending the German supply lines.  Then the Soviets would counterattack driving the Geamans back on their supply bases overextending the Soviet’s supply lines.  Then the Germans counter-counterattack driving the Soviets back.  Both armies were largely horse drawn, neither had a real logistics advantage without western support.  The result would be a long, drawn out war of attrition that the Soviets would eventually win by a Pyrrhic victory Leaving them too few men to take advantage of.  In the meantime the western war proceeds the same, or even better with the WAllies occupying Germany and liberating Eastern And Western Europe to return to free local rule.


it's not a BOARD GAME!!! where you move pieces here and there and magically fly units all over the board 
......see post # 479.....the US doesn't have the logistics to go that far and still be strong ..they didn't have enough logistics for Patton and Market Garden/etc etc


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> the US was not going to beat the Russian army
> remember, the US had FULL air and naval supremacy in Vietnam, but still did npt win


The US never applied it’s superiority in Vietnam.  When Nixon finally applied some of it in the Linebacker bombing campaigns and cut the road and rail links to China and closed Haiphong Harbor to Soviet ships with mines, the PRVN couldn’t sign a peace treaty fast enough.  We won that war.  The fact that the PRVN started a new war after being resupplied and retrained but the Soviets has no bearing.  If the democrats had lived up to the promises made to the RVN in the peace treaty, the PRVN would have lost AGAIN.  But they cowardly reneged on our guarantees of supplies and aerial support.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> No they didn’t.  The only thing about the T-34 that was superior to the Sherman was that it had lower ground pressure until the HVSS suspension was added to the Sherman.  The Sherman’s 75mm gun had almost identical performance to the T-34s 76mm gun and the Sherman’s 76mm gun was as good as the T-34’s 85mm gun with regular ammo and superior to it with the late war HVAP ammo.  The various KV and JS heavies were slow, unreliable and maintenance hogs useful only for frontal assaults on fortified positions or last ditch stands.  The Soviets were never skilled at armored warfare, they were skilled at using a their armor as a expendable club to overwhelm their opponents,


...but the Russians had a lot more tanks ....you say the Russian tanks were ''unreliable'' etc--but they beat the Germans


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> JESUS CHRIST--again, these people think it's a* board game* where you move pieces on a game board !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  typical
> .....again--the HUGE issue is logistics and distances to travel!!!!!!   = almost impossible
> and, for AZ --remember = the longer your  distance travel/''conquered'':
> needs MORE logistics EXPONENTIALLY
> ...


But the US had the logistical ability to do and the Germans and Soviets didn’t.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> The US never applied it’s superiority in Vietnam.  When Nixon finally applied some of it in the Linebacker bombing campaigns and cut the road and rail links to China and closed Haiphong Harbor to Soviet ships with mines, the PRVN couldn’t sign a peace treaty fast enough.  We won that war.  The fact that the PRVN started a new war after being resupplied and retrained but the Soviets has no bearing.  If the democrats had lived up to the promises made to the RVN in the peace treaty, the PRVN would have lost AGAIN.  But they cowardly reneged on our guarantees of supplies and aerial support.


what??? we had TACTICAL air supremacy .....Vietnam was unwinnable no matter what the US did
..the US dropped more tonnage in Nam than in WW2 !!!!!!
we won Vietnam ????!!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH




__





						Vietnam War was unwinnable
					

..we are talking REALITY--not nuking anyone....not invading the north like the Russians and US did to Germany --that wasn't going to happen--even if they did invade the North, they couldn't stay there forever..... ..first--the French lost--and after we gave them MILLIONS$ and with all their...



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ...but the Russians had a lot more tanks ....you say the Russian tanks were ''unreliable'' etc--but they beat the Germans


They beat the Germans by drowning them in the blood of murdered Red Army troops and destroyed tanks.  That’s why they lost over twenty million people in the war.  That approach doesn’t work against American troops, we worship firepower and never send a man when a bullet or artillery shell will do the job.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> what??? we had TACTICAL air supremacy .....Vietnam was unwinnable no matter what the US did
> ..the US dropped more tonnage in Nam than in WW2 !!!!!!
> we won Vietnam ????!!!!!!
> HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
> ...


We had ROEs that prevented us from effectively using our air supremacy.  If we had been operating under WWII ROEs that didn’t worry about collateral damage, the war would have been over in months because we would have simply invaded and conquered North Vietnam instead of fighting an insurgency, that I’ll agree was doomed to failure.  We forced the PRVN to surrender by fighting a conventional bombing campaign, cutting it off from supplies and making the government and people face starvation.  North Vietnam wasn’t able to feed itself, and didn’t build a single rifle or make a single round of ammunition,  most of its food and all of its war making supplies came from either China or the USSR.  Read the Paris Peace Accords some time.  The PRVN surrendered and agreed to cease hostilities just like Germany did at Versailles after WWI, and France did after the fall of Napolean.  The only difference is that we didn't demand reparations.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> But the US had the logistical ability to do and the Germans and Soviets didn’t.


no--the US did not have the logistics to go past Germany and still be as strong.....read again--Patton had to stop because of lack of logistics 
..again--the longer you go and the more territory you conquer, the more logistics are needed EXPONENTIALLY 
...the Russians had the manpower and tanks to cover/defend  MORE territory than was needed for a front against the Allies 
...the Russians had MCUH more manpower/tanks/etc


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> They beat the Germans by drowning them in the blood of murdered Red Army troops and destroyed tanks.  That’s why they lost over twenty million people in the war.  That approach doesn’t work against American troops, we worship firepower and never send a man when a bullet or artillery shell will do the job.


you contradicted yourself


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> We had ROEs that prevented us from effectively using our air supremacy.  If we had been operating under WWII ROEs that didn’t worry about collateral damage, the war would have been over in months because we would have simply invaded and conquered North Vietnam instead of fighting an insurgency, that I’ll agree was doomed to failure.  We forced the PRVN to surrender by fighting a conventional bombing campaign, cutting it off from supplies and making the government and people face starvation.  North Vietnam wasn’t able to feed itself, and didn’t build a single rifle or make a single round of ammunition,  most of its food and all of its war making supplies came from either China or the USSR.  Read the Paris Peace Accords some time.  The PRVN surrendered and agreed to cease hostilities just like Germany did at Versailles after WWI, and France did after the fall of Napolean.  The only difference is that we didn't demand reparations.


we didn't have ROEs in Korea and China whooped our asses


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> We had ROEs that prevented us from effectively using our air supremacy.  If we had been operating under WWII ROEs that didn’t worry about collateral damage, the war would have been over in months because we would have simply invaded and conquered North Vietnam instead of fighting an insurgency, that I’ll agree was doomed to failure.  We forced the PRVN to surrender by fighting a conventional bombing campaign, cutting it off from supplies and making the government and people face starvation.  North Vietnam wasn’t able to feed itself, and didn’t build a single rifle or make a single round of ammunition,  most of its food and all of its war making supplies came from either China or the USSR.  Read the Paris Peace Accords some time.  The PRVN surrendered and agreed to cease hostilities just like Germany did at Versailles after WWI, and France did after the fall of Napolean.  The only difference is that we didn't demand reparations.


..I've been over this many times----Vietnam was not an industrious country---you could bomb the shit out of them with NO ROEs and still no win


----------



## harmonica (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> We had ROEs that prevented us from effectively using our air supremacy.  If we had been operating under WWII ROEs that didn’t worry about collateral damage, the war would have been over in months because we would have simply invaded and conquered North Vietnam instead of fighting an insurgency, that I’ll agree was doomed to failure.  We forced the PRVN to surrender by fighting a conventional bombing campaign, cutting it off from supplies and making the government and people face starvation.  North Vietnam wasn’t able to feed itself, and didn’t build a single rifle or make a single round of ammunition,  most of its food and all of its war making supplies came from either China or the USSR.  Read the Paris Peace Accords some time.  The PRVN surrendered and agreed to cease hostilities just like Germany did at Versailles after WWI, and France did after the fall of Napolean.  The only difference is that we didn't demand reparations.


conventional bombing does not win wars--I've been over this before in my thread that I linked....no ROEs in WW2...Germany was an industrious country ...we bombed the shit out of them--no win until the Russians went in on the *GROUND *into the Reichstag


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> AZrailwhale
> both sides made bad decisions/etc.....war is not like making a sandwich...there is much to it......a LOT of it [ war/battles ] has to do with LOGISTICS
> ......Rapido is a perfect example of an idiot American general forcing troops into a kill zone .....
> ......plain and simple, the Allied leaders were not GODs who were PERFECT


Patton was revolted that we allowed "great Esstern European capitals" to be handed to Uncle Joe and the Communists


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> no--the US did not have the logistics to go past Germany and still be as strong.....read again--Patton had to stop because of lack of logistics
> ..again--the longer you go and the more territory you conquer, the more logistics are needed EXPONENTIALLY
> ...the Russians had the manpower and tanks to cover/defend  MORE territory than was needed for a front against the Allies
> ...the Russians had MCUH more manpower/tanks/etc
> View attachment 552643


The Allies temporarily stopped until the engineers could bring up the pipelines and rail lines to supply the armies.  Then we were good for another five hundred or so miles before another logistics halt would be needed.  The Soviets lacked the ability to rapidly lay rails and pipelines so they were dependent on lend lease trucks from their rail heads to the front line and even then never came up with anything like the Red Ball Express to move vast quantities of supplies quickly by truck.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> we didn't have ROEs in Korea and China whooped our asses


No the Chinese didn’t.  They launched a surprise attack, catching MacAurther off guard and pushed the UN forces back. The UN forces regrouped, and pushed the Chinese back to the 38th parrellel where they chose to stop.  In the process, the UN forces killed somewhere between 180,000 and 460,000 Chinese troops in the process.  That’s a major defeat of the Chinese by the UN forces.  If anybody got their asses whooped it was the Chinese “volunteers” and the North Koreans.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> ..I've been over this many times----Vietnam was not an industrious country---you could bomb the shit out of them with NO ROEs and still no win


We won by blocking all the imported food and war supplies fed from China via the road and rail links and from the USSR via Haiphong Harbor.  Without those supplies the North Vietnamese couldn’t prosecute the war.  The PRVN immediately signed the Paris Peace Accords after delaying them for over a year when it looked like they were winning.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

harmonica said:


> conventional bombing does not win wars--I've been over this before in my thread that I linked....no ROEs in WW2...Germany was an industrious country ...we bombed the shit out of them--no win until the Russians went in on the *GROUND *into the Reichstag


The Soviets were only able to advance because allied bombing had destroyed the German economy.  There was no coal to heat the factories or remaining homes, no oil, not even ersatz oil to fuel the tanks and aircraft the slave labor factories were producing, the railroads and bridges were destroyed by allied air power.  The “divisions” the Red Army was facing had fewer than a hundred “tanks” most of which were actually Hetzer tank destroyers, improvised antitank armored cars, backed up by a few assault guns and actual tanks and no food for troops or civilians.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 16, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> The Soviets were only able to advance because allied bombing had destroyed the German economy.  There was no coal to heat the factories or remaining homes, no oil, not even ersatz oil to fuel the tanks and aircraft the slave labor factories were producing, the railroads and bridges were destroyed by allied air power.  The “divisions” the Red Army was facing had fewer than a hundred “tanks” most of which were actually Hetzer tank destroyers, improvised antitank armored cars, backed up by a few assault guns and actual tanks and no food for troops or civilians.





harmonica said:


> you contradicted yourself


No I didn’t, the Soviets were wasteful of men and tanks.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 17, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> No I didn’t, the Soviets were wasteful of men and tanks.


..the Germans INCREASED their production even after the big bombing raids ..it wasn't until we got the P51 enmasse, that we really started to get air supremacy/etc ....








						Allied bombing of Germany during the second world war
					

Kurt Vonnegut and John Kenneth Galbraith remember the Allied attacks on German cities




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## harmonica (Oct 17, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> We won by blocking all the imported food and war supplies fed from China via the road and rail links and from the USSR via Haiphong Harbor.  Without those supplies the North Vietnamese couldn’t prosecute the war.  The PRVN immediately signed the Paris Peace Accords after delaying them for over a year when it looked like they were winning.


that's funny--I thought there is no South Vietnam today ......????!!!
AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## Correll (Oct 17, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Why would the Nazis surrender when their entire Army is still active on the Eastern Front?




Because they are losing  badly, and it is better to surrender earlier than later when even more of your people have died and your country is reduced to rubble.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 17, 2021)

Correll said:


> Because they are losing  badly, and it is better to surrender earlier than later when even more of your people have died and your country is reduced to rubble.


You can’t have it both ways and claim the Soviets needed our lend lease to defeat the Nazis and then claim the Nazis were being beaten badly


----------



## Ringo (Oct 17, 2021)

PoliticalChic said:


> World War II left over 27 million Soviet citizens dead....but *only a fraction of them were killed by the Germans.* Yet throughout the West. 'war crimes' is a phrase only attacked to the Nazis. *When the Red Army marched, an NKVD army marched behind, with its own tanks, machine guns, firing forward....never allowing retreat.*



This time, Tokyo Rose dived to the bottom of the stinkiest outhouse for a portion of her vile propaganda. Only Goebbels and freaks like him dared to write that it was not Hitler, but Stalin who killed most of the Soviet 27 million during the war. I wish you, nazi skunk, to choke on your nazi vomit.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 17, 2021)

Ringo said:


> This time, Tokyo Rose dived to the bottom of the stinkiest outhouse for a portion of her vile propaganda. Only Goebbels and freaks like him dared to write that it was not Hitler, but Stalin who killed most of the Soviet 27 million during the war. I wish you, nazi skunk, to choke on your nazi vomit.





Ringo said:


> This time, Tokyo Rose dived to the bottom of the stinkiest outhouse for a portion of her vile propaganda. Only Goebbels and freaks like him dared to write that it was not Hitler, but Stalin who killed most of the Soviet 27 million during the war. I wish you, nazi skunk, to choke on your nazi vomit.





Watch this, Bonzo.
"In 1945 Zhukov is reported to have said to US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, "If we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks exactly as it were not there." The shear weight of numbers eventually drove the Germans back, along with the Soviet leadership's determination not to relent, whatever the cost." http://www.moreorless.net.au/heroes/zhukov.html

The Russian general is used to such supplicant behavior. During the war, he ordered his troops to shoot any of their comrades who ran from the Germans, and any Russian village that was thought to have collaborated with the Nazis was burned to the ground. Zhukov is so feared that other Russian generals have been known to tremble in his presence. 
"Killing Patton," O'Reilly


Russians would do anything not to return to Roosevelt's pal's 'paradise.'

4. The 850,000 strong army of Gen. Andrei Andreyevich Vlasov, having *gone to the other side, Germany, "to save their country from Stalin" *and having later surrendered to US forces, "formed the core of those forcebly repatritated between 1944 and 1947."
"Operation Keelhaul; The Story of Forced Repatriation from 1944 to the Present.by Julius Epstein p.27, 53.



 Gen. Deniken, former commanding general of the White Russian armies which were supported by the USA in 1917-1920, explained that* none of these men served in the Nazi army out of love for Germany..."they hated the Germans" he wrote....rather, they knew what awaited them in the 'Soviet paradise.'





More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal"byNikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.*





And, in the Times, March 5, 1946: " - Many *thousands of persons hostile to the present regime in the Soviet Union* are being forcibly sent there....the Catholic Church constantly received appeals from 'displaced persons' terrified of being sent back to territory now controlled by Russia."

How badly did these individuals not want to go to Stalin's USSR? From the NYTimes, January 20, 1946: "Ten renegade Russian soldiers, in a frenzy of terror over *their impending repatriation to the homeland, committed suicide* today during a riot in the Dachau prison camp...."




That's right.....you Bolsheviks are the ones who killed most of the Russian casualties.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 17, 2021)

Ringo said:


> This time, Tokyo Rose dived to the bottom of the stinkiest outhouse for a portion of her vile propaganda. Only Goebbels and freaks like him dared to write that it was not Hitler, but Stalin who killed most of the Soviet 27 million during the war. I wish you, nazi skunk, to choke on your nazi vomit.


Tokyo Rose is still upset that her man Hitler did not win


----------



## Ringo (Oct 17, 2021)

PoliticalChic said:


> That's right.....you Bolsheviks are the ones who killed most of the Russian casualties.


Stop throwing your feces around.  It is just disgusting!


----------



## Correll (Oct 17, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> You can’t have it both ways and claim the Soviets needed our lend lease to defeat the Nazis and then claim the Nazis were being beaten badly



Just because the meatgrinder that was the eastern front might be a few hundred miles more to the East, would not mean that it would not still be bleeding the germans white.


Not to mention that the UK and America forces would not be sitting on their hands.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 17, 2021)

Correll said:


> Not to mention that the UK and America forces would not be sitting on their hands.



No they wouldn’t 

They would be killed fighting German and then Soviet forces as they invaded Poland, Ukraine and Russia


----------



## Correll (Oct 17, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> No they wouldn’t
> 
> They would be killed fighting German and then Soviet forces as they invaded Poland, Ukraine and Russia




What are you getting out of this? Is it just that you cannot stand any criticism of a Dem historical figure? Or is it the Commies that you need to protect here?


Does the idea of a weaker Soviet Union, post war, less able to threaten teh West, seem like a BAD outcome to you?


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 17, 2021)

Correll said:


> What are you getting out of this? Is it just that you cannot stand any criticism of a Dem historical figure? Or is it the Commies that you need to protect here?
> 
> 
> Does the idea of a weaker Soviet Union, post war, less able to threaten teh West, seem like a BAD outcome to you?


Just putting your ridiculous claims to rest

WWII was not a board game. It was a war that killed tens of millions of people. I am merely pointing out that the US a public would not have accepted the massive casualties to invade Eastern Europe


----------



## Correll (Oct 17, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Just putting your ridiculous claims to rest
> 
> WWII was not a board game. It was a war that killed tens of millions of people. I am merely pointing out that the US a public would not have accepted the massive casualties to invade Eastern Europe




If Germany surrendered, we would not be invading Eastern Europe, but moving it to take over as they hand it over. 


D'uh.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 18, 2021)

harmonica said:


> that's funny--I thought there is no South Vietnam today ......????!!!
> AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


Because the PRVN started a new war after the Soviets rearmed and retrained it’s army for free.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Oct 18, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Tokyo Rose is still upset that her man Hitler did not win


Tokyo Rose was forced to make those broadcasts.  She’s been vindicated by historians.


----------



## Iamartiewhitefox (Oct 18, 2021)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...


We would not have war in the first place, had people hear what Jesus said, rather the than the what is truth question, that Pontius Pilate asked.  Us, being made in the Father God's image, have the possibility to inherit a kingdom that is not of this world. They that are like the peacful Jesus, will live in that world.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 18, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> Because the PRVN started a new war after the Soviets rearmed and retrained it’s army for free.


''a new war''  
ok
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## harmonica (Oct 18, 2021)

Iamartiewhitefox said:


> We would not have war in the first place, had people hear what Jesus said, rather the than the what is truth question, that Pontius Pilate asked.  Us, being made in the Father God's image, have the possibility to inherit a kingdom that is not of this world. They that are like the peacful Jesus, will live in that world.


there is no god


----------



## harmonica (Oct 18, 2021)

AZrailwhale said:


> Tokyo Rose was forced to make those broadcasts.  She’s been vindicated by historians.


she was a WHORE


----------



## Ringo (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> If Germany surrendered, we would not be invading Eastern Europe, but moving it to take over as they hand it over.
> D'uh.


Why on earth would Germany surrender to the United States? Just like that? After it easily took over the whole of Europe?


----------



## harmonica (Oct 18, 2021)

Ringo said:


> Why on earth would Germany surrender to the United States? Just like that? After it easily took over the whole of Europe?


-----we bombed the shit out of them...we had forces on BOTH sides......the Russians [ just outside of Berlin ] were raping the shit out of them, ETC, and they still were *not *surrendering


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> If Germany surrendered, we would not be invading Eastern Europe, but moving it to take over as they hand it over.
> 
> 
> D'uh.


You are assuming Hitler would have surrendered while he still had massive forces to the East?


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

Ringo said:


> Why on earth would Germany surrender to the United States? Just like that? After it easily took over the whole of Europe?




IMO, the demand for unconditional surrender was a mistake. Letting the german government know that something could be salvaged, instead of the nation being absolutely crushed or occupied by the freaking commies, would have been a motive to surrender to US and the UK.


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> You are assuming Hitler would have surrendered while he still had massive forces to the East?




Hitler would never surrender. Hence my earlier comment on him "falling down a flight of stairs". 


Why are you pretending that every post of mine is in isolation and that you are ignorant of everything that was said before? 


Are you just practicing how reflexively dishonest you can be, for the more important current event discussions, or has it become an uncontrollable reflex for you?


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> IMO, the demand for unconditional surrender was a mistake. Letting the german government know that something could be salvaged, instead of the nation being absolutely crushed or occupied by the freaking commies, would have been a motive to surrender to US and the UK.


Yet, they didn’t surrender to the US and UK as the Soviets were storming in from the East
In fact, they didn’t surrender as the Soviets took Berlin

How could you advocate anything but unconditional surrender after knowing the atrocities of the Nazis?


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Yet, they didn’t surrender to the US and UK as the Soviets were storming in from the East
> In fact, they didn’t surrender as the Soviets took Berlin
> 
> How could you advocate anything but unconditional surrender after knowing the atrocities of the Nazis?




To lessen or avoid the Cold War, with all of it's atrocities and the threat of nuclear holocaust. 


And considering that we are considering decisions made without the benefit of foreknowledge, the real possibility of a commie win, and thus a really shitty world, were lefties like you, define what is a right and wrong and tens of millions, if not more, die, and billions live in abject oppression.


----------



## Ringo (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> , instead of the nation being absolutely crushed or occupied by the freaking commies, would have been a motive to surrender to US and the UK.


The only  freaking thing here is you. As for soviets they were are noble allies in the fight with real and clear Evil and only freaking freaks at that time could think of separate peace with Hitler.
But by this time, American and British soldiers saw the nazi death camps and realized for sure, who they were fighting. A jerk who proposed a separate peace with the nazis would be rolled in tar and feathers and thrown out of political life.
Besides, you forgot, that the United States was vitally interested in the participation of the USSR in the war with Japan. The USSR fulfilled its promise on time, thereby saving the United States from invading the islands and many thousands of casualties among its troops . What thanks did it get for that? No bloody thanks!

The United States, fattened by the war, with reserves of gold from all over the world, having no destruction on its territory and occupying its main rivals in the economic competition, really thought about world domination. Only the USSR was on the way. That's why the Cold War began. The Soviet Union, dilapidated and having lost a huge number of people, did not need any war. But Capitalism thought otherwise.
When even the german monopolies, in the losing country, came out of the war with huge profits, what can we say about the capitalists of the winning countries? Isn't war wonderful! And preparing for war brings huge profits ...  So - The Cold War!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 18, 2021)

Iamartiewhitefox said:


> We would not have war in the first place, had people hear what Jesus said, rather the than the what is truth question, that Pontius Pilate asked.  Us, being made in the Father God's image, have the possibility to inherit a kingdom that is not of this world. They that are like the peacful Jesus, will live in that world.





There are two opposing forces extant.

There always will be.

And evil must be battled.

Let those who love the Lord hate evil, psalm 97:10


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 18, 2021)

Ringo said:


> Only  freaking thing here is you. As for soviets they were are noble allies in the fight with real and clear Evil and only freaking freaks at that time could think of separate peace with Hitler.
> But by this time, American and British soldiers saw the nazi death camps and realized for sure, who they were fighting. A jerk who proposed a separate peace with the nazis would be rolled in tar and feathers and thrown out of political life.
> Besides, you forgot, that the United States was vitally interested in the participation of the USSR in the war with Japan. The USSR fulfilled its promise on time, thereby saving the United States from invading the islands and many thousands of casualties among its troops . What thanks did it get for that? No bloody thanks!
> 
> The United States, fattened by the war, with reserves of gold from all over the world, having no destruction on its territory and occupying its main rivals in the economic competition, really thought about world domination. Only the USSR was on the way. That's why the Cold War began. The Soviet Union, dilapidated and having lost a huge number of people, did not need any war. But Capitalism thought otherwise.





" As for soviets they were are noble allies...."

Of course they weren't, Bonzo.



Victor Kravchenko, one of the first and most influential Soviet defectors to the United States, who had written "I Chose Freedom," a searing account of life under Stalin.

A year and a half after WWII began in Europe, Roosevelt’s Lend-Lease supplied a prodigious amount of war materiel to Russia, without which the embattled Red Army, the only challenge to Hitler’s forces, would have been defeated. The temporary congruence of interests was called an alliance, albeit a strange one. For example, when the Americans tried to find a way that long-range American bombers could land in Russia to re-fuel, so as to bomb deep into Germany, the Russians were found to be suspicious, ungrateful, secretive, xenophobic, unfriendly, in short….a great deal of take and very little give.



 While American presence in Russia was modest and equivocal, Russian presence in wartime America was so large that they had to set up a corporate headquarters on Sixteenth Street in Washington. One of the executives in the huge staff was Victor Kravchenko, metallurgist, engineer, executive, and captain in the Red Army. And the first Soviet “defector.”



Kravchenko, a mining and steel engineer, was a mid-level official in the Soviet lend-lease office in Washington, D.C., when he sought asylum in 1944. At the time, the Soviet Union was still a U.S. war ally, and many Americans were willing to give the benefit of the doubt to "Uncle Joe" Stalin. Kravchenko wanted to shatter those illusions. His defection was front-page news and prompted debate at the highest levels of government, up to and including President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Stalin demanded that he be turned over as a traitor--an automatic death sentence. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover urged FDR to let him stay. On April 13, 1945, the day after Roosevelt died, Kravchenko received notice that his application for asylum had been granted. 
http://www.latimes.com/la-tm-kravchenko11may11,0,6020141,full.story




Victor Kravchenko appeared before the committee, speaking in rapid-fire Russian and occasionally switching to heavily accented, balky English. He told the committee that *"every responsible representative of the Soviet government in the United States may be regarded as an economic or political spy," and that no Soviet citizen arrived in the U.S. without a "specific assignment" to collect secret documents. *He also declared it "foolish and dangerous" to underrate the ability of the Russians to produce nuclear weapons, and said that Soviet disarmament plans were a sham, designed to "play for time." http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1992-02-12/news/l-affaire-fravchenko/


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 18, 2021)

Ringo said:


> Why on earth would Germany surrender to the United States? Just like that? After it easily took over the whole of Europe?





Just a further explanation about why the brain-washed, dedicated Liberals believe absurdities such as "Germany was about to take over the world."

If government school didn't cause them to believe that rubbish, there would be a question about why Franklin Roosevelt worked tirelessly to support the homicidal maniac Joseph Stalin, and make certain that Soviet Communism survived, and found a home in his administration and in America.

No, Germany would not have conquered the USSR.

Hitler knew that....and so must have Roosevelt.

Here are the facts:
.. when Operation Barbarossa started on June 22, 1941, *the available (German) supplies of fuel, tires, spare parts etc., were only good enough for about two months.....*

Stalin, in fact, had been supplying resources to Hitler.

The Wehrmacht continued to advance, albeit *very slowly, and by mid-November *some units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But the *troops were now totally exhausted, and running out of supplies. Their commanders knew that it was simply impossible to take Moscow.*
Hitler s Failed Blitzkrieg against the Soviet Union. The Battle of Moscow and Stalingrad Turning Point of World War II Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization
72 Years Ago, December 1941: Turning Point of World War II
'The Victory of the Red Army in front of Moscow was a Major Break'…
by Jacques Pauwels



By attacking in June,* Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.*
He didn't.


So....once one recognizes that Stalin was going to be the winner.....
....why did FDR send him supplies that the Allies could have used?

The schools hide the truth to shield FDR from richly deserved contumely.









Same reason so many universities eschew teaching the French Revolution....students might recognize that it gave birth to every totalitarian revolution in modern times.





"....realistically middle sized *Germany could not defeat the much larger Ussr *in the long term. Germany would have eventually surrendered to the western allies to prevent total occupation by the USSR ..."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence (comment)


----------



## Ringo (Oct 18, 2021)

PoliticalChic said:


> By attacking in June,* Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.*
> He didn't.


Then why didn't he attack in the summer? Oh, I forgot, he really attacked in the summer....
 And according to "Barbarossa's" plans, the war was supposed to be over in two months. So, let's count July, August... there is no frost, September, October, too, in general, normal weather... Who prevented Hitler from ending the war according to the well-developed plan of the cleverest German General Staff? Hm... It's a mystery... In truth, there is no mystery, it's just that the beaten conquerors, including Napoleon, like to look for excuses for their failures in the Russian winter. Well, Asian untermensh can't beat highly cultured Europeans. It's all bad weather!
 But if it's bad weather and your wonderful tanks are drowning in mud, then maybe you should read a geography textbook and find out that there are autumn and winter in Russia and therefore create such tanks that the Russian weather could not do anything to? "Hey!" - the Nazi prostitute will answer you - "Why do we need such tanks. after all, the plan was to end the war before the fall!"....
 The circle has closed. The Nazis were defeated by winter, and they did not prepare for it because they planned to end the war earlier... Well, if you planned, why didn't you finish it? "It's all Russian Winter!".....

Why argue at all and prove something to the nazi scum?

P.S. Hitler started the war with Russia at the same time as Napoleon, and Napoleon's army, on foot, reached Moscow in early september. Hitler's army, on tanks, cars and planes, reached Moscow in december..... Who prevented them from at least repeating the achievements of Napoleon? Another historical mystery...
Probably the tsarist NKVD detachments shot half of the tsarist army, that's why the french  were ahead of the germans in pace of advancement...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 18, 2021)

Ringo said:


> Then why didn't he attack in the summer? Oh, I forgot, he really attacked in the summer....
> And according to "Barbarossa's" plans, the war was supposed to be over in two months. So, let's count July, August... there is no frost, September, October, too, in general, normal weather... Who prevented Hitler from ending the war according to the well-developed plan of the cleverest German General Staff? Hm... It's a mystery... In truth, there is no mystery, it's just that the beaten conquerors, including Napoleon, like to look for excuses for their failures in the Russian winter. Well, Asian untermensh can't beat highly cultured Europeans. It's all bad weather!
> But if it's bad weather and your wonderful tanks are drowning in mud, then maybe you should read a geography textbook and find out that there are autumn and winter in Russia and therefore create such tanks that the Russian weather could not do anything to? "Hey!" - the Nazi prostitute will answer you - "Why do we need such tanks. after all, the plan was to end the war before the fall!"....
> The circle has closed. The Nazis were defeated by winter, and they did not prepare for it because they planned to end the war earlier... Well, if you planned, why didn't you finish it? "It's all Russian Winter!".....
> ...




Just as little children like to run around in exaggerated cowboy outfits, from time to time we get this sort of juvenile, insipid poster who pretends to support the insupportable, in order to get attention.


Everyone, including this dunce, knows what savages, what  barbarians, what murderers Stalin and his henchmen were.....and are.

I admit I respond to his posts simply for the purpose of educating those who might read his garbage.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> Hitler would never surrender. Hence my earlier comment on him "falling down a flight of stairs".
> 
> 
> Why are you pretending that every post of mine is in isolation and that you are ignorant of everything that was said before?
> ...


Another revisionist History myth
There were 30 attempts on Hitlers life. Those involved were tortured and executed as were members of their families.

The idea that you could assassinate Hitler and the Nazis would just surrender has no merit
Nazi’s would have just implemented next man up


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> To lessen or avoid the Cold War, with all of it's atrocities and the threat of nuclear holocaust.
> 
> 
> And considering that we are considering decisions made without the benefit of foreknowledge, the real possibility of a commie win, and thus a really shitty world, were lefties like you, define what is a right and wrong and tens of millions, if not more, die, and billions live in abject oppression.



Guess what?
The Cold War worked

A lot of threats and posturing but no real war

How could you substitute real war with the Soviets and say it was a better option?


----------



## Ringo (Oct 18, 2021)

PoliticalChic said:


> Everyone, including this dunce, knows what savages, what  barbarians, what murderers Stalin and his henchmen were.....and are.


Oh! The last defense line of the lying scoundrel: "Everyone knows that!"


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 18, 2021)

Ringo said:


> Oh! The last defense line of the lying scoundrel: "Everyone knows that!"





Step off, dunce.


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

Ringo said:


> The only  freaking thing here is you. As for soviets they were are noble allies in the fight with real and clear Evil and only freaking freaks at that time could think of separate peace with Hitler.
> But by this time, American and British soldiers saw the nazi death camps and realized for sure, who they were fighting. A jerk who proposed a separate peace with the nazis would be rolled in tar and feathers and thrown out of political life.
> Besides, you forgot, that the United States was vitally interested in the participation of the USSR in the war with Japan. The USSR fulfilled its promise on time, thereby saving the United States from invading the islands and many thousands of casualties among its troops . What thanks did it get for that? No bloody thanks!
> 
> ...




Interesting. I clearly spelled out that the first thing required would be Hitler dying, and you are talking about a "Peace with Hitler".


SO, you are a commie, I take it? And an America hater.


----------



## Otis Mayfield (Oct 18, 2021)

Stalin was more of a threat to his fellow Soviets than to the Germans.

Stalin killed roughly 25 million Soviet citizens, mostly with famine, but he also killed millions by executions or sending them to gulags.

Stalin had a wicked sense of humor. When he'd meet someone he'd act surprised and say, "you aren't in jail?!"


----------



## Ringo (Oct 18, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Stalin was more of a threat to his fellow Soviets than to the Germans.
> 
> Stalin killed roughly 25 million Soviet citizens, mostly with famine, but he also killed millions by executions or sending them to gulags.
> 
> Stalin had a wicked sense of humor. When he'd meet someone he'd act surprised and say, "you aren't in jail?!"


Every line here is a lie. Have you tried to become a politician? You can do it.


----------



## Ringo (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> SO, you are a commie, I take it? And an America hater.


Yes. And if you are american nazi, also yes.


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Another revisionist History myth
> There were 30 attempts on Hitlers life. Those involved were tortured and executed as were members of their families.
> 
> The idea that you could assassinate Hitler and the Nazis would just surrender has no merit
> Nazi’s would have just implemented next man up




Cool story bruh. Now, I of course, said nothing like, "the Nazi would just surrender".


I'm not sure what you get out of turning every conversation into the other person having to spend all of their time, reminding you what they actually said, and calling you out on how you just make up shit.


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

rightwinger said:


> Guess what?
> The Cold War worked
> 
> A lot of threats and posturing but no real war
> ...




And of course, we were discussing decisions made at teh time based on what they knew at the time.



If we are going to be basing it on what we know NOW in the 21st century, then FDR could have just waited till the bomb was ready and nuked Berlin and not spent the lives to invade.


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

Otis Mayfield said:


> Stalin was more of a threat to his fellow Soviets than to the Germans.
> 
> Stalin killed roughly 25 million Soviet citizens, mostly with famine, but he also killed millions by executions or sending them to gulags.
> 
> Stalin had a wicked sense of humor. When he'd meet someone he'd act surprised and say, "you aren't in jail?!"




LOL! That would have been sort of funny. It a  dark, twisted sort of way.


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

Ringo said:


> Yes. And if you are american nazi, also yes.
> 
> ....



I've said nothing indicating that. So, don't be a fucking asshole on top of being a supporter of a genocidal totalitarian ideology. 



So, got it. YOu are offended by my idea because it would have weaked communism and strengthened America and the Free World.


That is why I like it.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> IMO, the demand for unconditional surrender was a mistake. Letting the german government know that something could be salvaged, instead of the nation being absolutely crushed or occupied by the freaking commies, would have been a motive to surrender to US and the UK.


no--it wasn't ---remember WW1?  less than a generation later the Germans started the shit again.......
....in WW2 we DESTROYED Germany and Japan....Russia raped Germany .....that's what was needed so they KNEW not to start shit again--they learned their lesson 
...because we didn't call for unconditional surrender and didn't destroy Germany in WW1, we got WW2
...and--AND, as other members and I have stated-*-hitler wasn't going to surrender--*conditionally


----------



## harmonica (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> To lessen or avoid the Cold War, with all of it's atrocities and the threat of nuclear holocaust.
> 
> 
> And considering that we are considering decisions made without the benefit of foreknowledge, the real possibility of a commie win, and thus a really shitty world, were lefties like you, define what is a right and wrong and tens of millions, if not more, die, and billions live in abject oppression.


.....that would not lessen the Cold War or threat of nuclear holocaust --AND you have no proof of that


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

harmonica said:


> no--it wasn't ---remember WW1?  less than a generation later the Germans started the shit again.......
> ....in WW2 we DESTROYED Germany and Japan....Russia raped Germany .....that's what was needed so they KNEW not to start shit again--they learned their lesson
> ...because we didn't call for unconditional surrender and didn't destroy Germany in WW1, we got WW2
> ...and--AND, as other members and I have stated-*-hitler wasn't going to surrender--*conditionally




Maybe. Then we end up about were were ended up anyways, having to fight all the way to berlin. 


Would have been worth a shot, imo. 


(and yes, some german would have had to cap Hitler)


----------



## Correll (Oct 18, 2021)

harmonica said:


> .....that would not lessen the Cold War or threat of nuclear holocaust --AND you have no proof of that




Russia ending up with HALF Of europe in it's empire and thus being able to park it's massive tank forces right in the middle of germany, was a huge power boost for the commies.


I certainly have no "proof" that having all those tanks sitting a thousand miles to the east would have made things better for the West. 


But, I think it is very likely.


----------



## harmonica (Oct 18, 2021)

PoliticalChic said:


> Just a further explanation about why the brain-washed, dedicated Liberals believe absurdities such as "Germany was about to take over the world."
> 
> If government school didn't cause them to believe that rubbish, there would be a question about why Franklin Roosevelt worked tirelessly to support the homicidal maniac Joseph Stalin, and make certain that Soviet Communism survived, and found a home in his administration and in America.
> 
> ...


no no no ---they did not know the outcome of the war at that time--
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--you are thinking in *hindsight!*!!!! big time


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 18, 2021)

Correll said:


> Russia ending up with HALF Of europe in it's empire and thus being able to park it's massive tank forces right in the middle of germany, was a huge power boost for the commies.
> 
> 
> I certainly have no "proof" that having all those tanks sitting a thousand miles to the east would have made things better for the West.
> ...


Russia ended up with HALF of Europe because they fought and died for it

We did not give it to them


----------



## Litwin (Oct 19, 2021)

PoliticalChic said:


> The war propaganda in support of the Marxists has never abated, and has led America to a precipice. Now, the truth.
> 
> 
> 1.An interesting and significant month, August.
> ...








						Marxist bandits started WW2 and Cold War in 1920. Lenin about  taking  Red Army  to Germany, Poland , England, etc.
					

Marxist bandits started WW2 and Cold War in 1920. Lenin about  taking  Red Army  to Germany, Poland , England, etc.   "Even  more  importantly,  for  the  first  time,  Lenin  acknowledged  that  the  Red  Army  offensive into Poland in July 1920 aimed not only at the sovietisation of Poland...



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------

