Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's deflection.
It very directly addresses your own words and puts the lie to your conclusion.
Really asshole, I'm a liar because I say FDR respected the founders and you disagree and think he didn't?
It very directly addresses your own words and puts the lie to your conclusion.
Really asshole, I'm a liar because I say FDR respected the founders and you disagree and think he didn't?
You posed your own question and then answered it categorically. I responded by posing some telling questions of my own. When you realized what these questions demonstrated about your unambiguous claim you then started on this hissy fit.
And I didn't call you a "liar." I was thinking more along the lines of "idiot."
The soldier's view of the war was that the attack on Europe should come via Italy, which had surrendered and was controlled by Mark Clark and the Allies. Stalin, Roosevelt, Harry Hopkins, and George Marshall demanded western France as the attack zone (Stalin wanted Central and Eastern Europe left for occupation by the Red Army).
None of your bull can be taken seriously because you simply ignore fact and persistently promote the ridiculous claim that Italy was controlled by Gen. Clark and allied forces. I have posted details about the war in Italy and if you had read it, or actually knew anything about what you are basing your conspiracy theory on you would know that in planning the invasion of Europe there were those who looked at Italy and a southern strategy and those who looked a France. It took only a short time to understand that there was no such thing as a "soft underbelly" and all thoughts of a southern invasion had to be abandoned. One of your own links explains it and points out that even the biggest proponent of a southern strategy, Churchill, gave up on the idea after the invasion of Italy had proven to be far more costly than the proponents had anticipated.
You continue to insist Gen. Clark "controlled Italy when in fact the allies were forced to fight a slug fest and fight the Germans in a scorched earth campaign of head to head engagements that gave little or no opportunity for maneuver or advantage of overwhelming logistical advantage.
You simply can not admit the facts that crush your outrageous theory of Eisenhower because, well, to admit the facts crushes your conspiracy theory. But when you stand on the stupid assertion that the allies controlled Italy in early June of 1944 is just factually not plausible as a debatable topic and exposes your ridiculousness and purposeful lying to promote a weird conspiracy theory.
Ah....the Roosevelt apologist checks in!
If you are going to be two faced, at least make one of them pretty.
When will you be providing the answers to post #43?
After that you may address Clark, Spaatz, and Eisenhower....all of whom supported exactly what I said....in post #45.
A dunce like you can keep ignoring the facts for just so long.
In short, If you were a swine, you would be what you are now.
None of your bull can be taken seriously because you simply ignore fact and persistently promote the ridiculous claim that Italy was controlled by Gen. Clark and allied forces. I have posted details about the war in Italy and if you had read it, or actually knew anything about what you are basing your conspiracy theory on you would know that in planning the invasion of Europe there were those who looked at Italy and a southern strategy and those who looked a France. It took only a short time to understand that there was no such thing as a "soft underbelly" and all thoughts of a southern invasion had to be abandoned. One of your own links explains it and points out that even the biggest proponent of a southern strategy, Churchill, gave up on the idea after the invasion of Italy had proven to be far more costly than the proponents had anticipated.
You continue to insist Gen. Clark "controlled Italy when in fact the allies were forced to fight a slug fest and fight the Germans in a scorched earth campaign of head to head engagements that gave little or no opportunity for maneuver or advantage of overwhelming logistical advantage.
You simply can not admit the facts that crush your outrageous theory of Eisenhower because, well, to admit the facts crushes your conspiracy theory. But when you stand on the stupid assertion that the allies controlled Italy in early June of 1944 is just factually not plausible as a debatable topic and exposes your ridiculousness and purposeful lying to promote a weird conspiracy theory.
Ah....the Roosevelt apologist checks in!
If you are going to be two faced, at least make one of them pretty.
When will you be providing the answers to post #43?
After that you may address Clark, Spaatz, and Eisenhower....all of whom supported exactly what I said....in post #45.
A dunce like you can keep ignoring the facts for just so long.
In short, If you were a swine, you would be what you are now.
You are the one ignoring facts. And we haven't even used the word Dragoon. It's the history forum, so history buffs will recognize what Dragoon means. You, doubtful.
13. General Eisenhower was used to following George Marshall's orders,
.
Ah....the Roosevelt apologist checks in!
If you are going to be two faced, at least make one of them pretty.
When will you be providing the answers to post #43?
After that you may address Clark, Spaatz, and Eisenhower....all of whom supported exactly what I said....in post #45.
A dunce like you can keep ignoring the facts for just so long.
In short, If you were a swine, you would be what you are now.
You are the one ignoring facts. And we haven't even used the word Dragoon. It's the history forum, so history buffs will recognize what Dragoon means. You, doubtful.
Did you suggest that you are a 'history buff'?
You meant, 'butt,' didn't you?
Still mistake 'f' and 't,' huh?
Oh....and you forgot to respond to post #13....
This one:
I would be happy to grade your responses....
...but I need context: are your errors lies or based on ignorance?
Please advise.
Want me to give you the benefit of the doubt, and simply award you the title of 'dunce'?
13. General Eisenhower was used to following George Marshall's orders,
.
Holy crap, General Eisenhower followed the orders of his commander during WWII.
General Eisenhower was elected as a coda to the war, and a hope for new beginnings.
And, perhaps he lived up to both.
But he carried baggage, and a view that surprised quite a few.
1. Let's begin at the middle....and, later, head back to the war years.
Eisenhower was a product of his times, malleable as most are, and the crucible of his times was Franklin Roosevelt. For whatever the reasons, Roosevelt was a devotee of Stalin and the Soviets, and his administration was thoroughly infused with Soviet spies and sympathizers.
Based on the above, and one's natural inclinations where his career was involved....what should one expect?
a. But, unfortunately, the same pressures were exerted on large segments of the American population.
"Back in the 1930s, American liberals excused the communists of the Soviet Union as being simply Liberals in a Hurry.
Doug Ross spots a Timesperson visiting North Korea, retching at the horror before her and quips, New York Times visits North Korea, unintentionally reveals the endgame of the Democrats unchecked authoritarian agenda. Ed Driscoll » When ?Liberals in a Hurry? Reach the Endzone
Then, just as now.
b. Here is a view from the top:
"As Hitler marched into Poland, [Soviet agent] Whittaker Chambers arranged a private meeting with Adolf Berle, President Roosevelts assistant Secy of State. Chambers detailed the Communist espionage network, naming at least two dozen Soviet spies in Roosevelts 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 Americas Most Hated Senator," p. 60)
No action was taken, and in fact, Roosevelt promoted Hiss.
Remember, FDR was Eisenhower's boss.
c. How about Truman?
President Truman denounced the Hiss investigation as a red herring by do-nothing Republicans (Whitaker Chambers, Witness, p. 564-74)
Felix Frankfurter and Adlai Stevenson offered to be character witnesses for Hiss.
Such were the times.....not very different from these times.
2. Eisenhower become President on January 20, 1953. Understanding the free rein communists had in the times doesn't mean that many weren't aware of the danger posed by the communists, as many are today.
On August 24, 1953, Senator Jenner's eight-member judiciary subcommittee on internal security issued a unanimous report declaring that the penetration of the United States government by the Soviet international organization "has not been fully disclosed....
Policies and programs laid down by members of this Soviet conspiracy are still in effect within our government and constitute a continuing hazard to our national security."
And...have been largely successful in subverting America....it has been "fundamentally transformed" from what the 'greatest generation' fought for.
3. The communist penetration of the government occurred in the Roosevelt and Truman administrations, but policies and programs laid down by the Soviet conspiracy were still in effect after the Eisenhower administration had been in office seven months, according to the unanimous report of eight senators...
... there were indications that the Eisenhower administration would be little more diligent than its predecessors in exposing and eliminating the Soviet conspirators still remaining in the government.
Is that what was expected from his election?
Much of the above is based on Chesly Manly's "The Twenty Year Revolution."
It should be read by those who want to understand what went wrong, and how we got to today.
Like Ike WASNT a devotee of Stalin and the soviets as well?
Was FDR mentally unstable? No
Did he respect the founders Yes
Would you consider George Washington one of the founders? He established a precedent of serving no more than two terms as President that became a tradition by those who "respected the founders."
Does your reading of the Constitution suggest support by the founders for depriving innocent American citizens of life, liberty, and property without due process? Do you think the founders built a separation of powers into the Constitution so that one man in one branch of government could accumulate all power unto himself, turning the legislature into a rubber stamp and intimidating the highest court into compliance via threats? Do you think that's what the founders had in mind after throwing off the yolk of an unjust monarchy?
Yeah, so much respect there...
Hi PC. I appreciate your historical essays. Very interesting. I don't know much about Eisenhower. I do remember my dad calling him a "Communist sympathizer" when I was a little kid. I never spent the time to really find out what he meant. I've heard that little snippet of him warning of the "military-industrial complex" but that's about as far as it goes. I'm at work so I don't have time to really study your OP. I will try to pay it some time when I get home tonight. Thanks for your hard work.
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Read more at Dwight D. Eisenhower Quotes - BrainyQuote
Great man
So with all these commie dupe presidents we've had since Hoover, who won the battle, America or the USSR?
This false assertion "For whatever the reasons, Roosevelt was a devotee of Stalin and the Soviets" topples the OP.
Let's move on.
She knows nothing about America or American history.
PO VALLEY 1945
One of the best short synopsis of the Italian campaign at the beginning of this piece you will ever find. It explains how all the comments made by Ike and others, including Churchill became obsolete and tossed aside once the fighting began and the allied forces realized the Germans did not care about the Italians or their surrender and had decided to turn Italy into a meat grinder and make the allies fight for every foot of ground. It also shows how it took the allies until the spring of 1945 to reach the Valley of the Po and finely force the Germans out of Italy, almost a year after the Normandy Invasion. Dates make a difference in history. Duh
Post #43 awaits you.....
Your questions are just stupid and can not be debated or discussed to any kind of conclusion. You are using a common method of deflection from the actual factual and provable elements of your conspiracy theory.
Lets look at those questions.
Was FDR mentally unstable? No Did he support genocide No
Did he support Stalin's slaughter No
Was he stupid No
Did he respect the founders Yes
So there are the answers to your stupid loaded questions.
I have repeatedly answered your question about Italy and provided you with lots of links to make my point. What good does it do. You continue to live in this fantasy world where a 19 month string of battles up the Italian peninsula in WWII didn't happen.
What is left? Did FDR give eastern Europe to Stalin as a gift? No, he gave it to Stalin as a gift to western Europe with western Europe's blessing. It was a buffer between the west and the east. Eastern Europe did not have economic or military value to western Europe and the USA. Eastern Europe was seen as a burden. So he let Stalin have the burden.
Finally, Hiss, scholars have been debating him for years. That debate will go on forever unless someday the US declassifies documents to show what some speculate was a counter intelligence effort and operation that makes him an unrecognized hero.
This false assertion "For whatever the reasons, Roosevelt was a devotee of Stalin and the Soviets" topples the OP.
Let's move on.
She knows nothing about America or American history.
PO VALLEY 1945
One of the best short synopsis of the Italian campaign at the beginning of this piece you will ever find. It explains how all the comments made by Ike and others, including Churchill became obsolete and tossed aside once the fighting began and the allied forces realized the Germans did not care about the Italians or their surrender and had decided to turn Italy into a meat grinder and make the allies fight for every foot of ground. It also shows how it took the allies until the spring of 1945 to reach the Valley of the Po and finely force the Germans out of Italy, almost a year after the Normandy Invasion. Dates make a difference in history. Duh
Post #43 awaits you.....
Your questions are just stupid and can not be debated or discussed to any kind of conclusion. You are using a common method of deflection from the actual factual and provable elements of your conspiracy theory.
Lets look at those questions.
Was FDR mentally unstable? No Did he support genocide No
Did he support Stalin's slaughter No
Was he stupid No
Did he respect the founders Yes
So there are the answers to your stupid loaded questions.
I have repeatedly answered your question about Italy and provided you with lots of links to make my point. What good does it do. You continue to live in this fantasy world where a 19 month string of battles up the Italian peninsula in WWII didn't happen.
What is left? Did FDR give eastern Europe to Stalin as a gift? No, he gave it to Stalin as a gift to western Europe with western Europe's blessing. It was a buffer between the west and the east. Eastern Europe did not have economic or military value to western Europe and the USA. Eastern Europe was seen as a burden. So he let Stalin have the burden.
Finally, Hiss, scholars have been debating him for years. That debate will go on forever unless someday the US declassifies documents to show what some speculate was a counter intelligence effort and operation that makes him an unrecognized hero.
