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.
Why would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
So far, you have not posted or shown what you refer to as "real history". You have posted and discussed conclusions of unproven conspiracy theories and rejected revisionism promoted by agenda driven entities like the John Birch Society.FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
PoliticalChics own links refute her outrageously fraudulent statement.Soviet deaths, over 10 million
US deaths in Europe, 200,000
Soviets killed 4 million Nazis, US killed 300,000 mostly through bombing raids
The Soviets faced the majority of the German Army on the Eastern Front. The Western Front was defended by fewer divisions and less than top notch troops
For all this, FDR ended up with all of Western Europe (the best part economically) the Soviets got to keep territory they fought and died for
I seriously doubt FDR ordered Hitler to invade the Soviet Union in order to have the Soviets do "90% of the fighting".
Each of your silly pronouncements surpasses the previous. You get a certain credit for constancy, I suppose.
In spite of Stalin's demands that we invade Europe as early as 1942, FDR held back on the invasion of France until June 1944. Every month that FDR held off invading cost Stalin tens of thousands of deaths and saved us thousands of deaths
"In late May 1942 the Soviet Union and the United States made a joint announcement that a "... full understanding was reached with regard to the urgent tasks of creating a second front in Europe in 1942." However, Churchill persuaded Roosevelt to postpone the promised invasion as, even with American help, the Allies did not have adequate forces for such a strike.
"Instead of an immediate return to France, the Western Allies staged offensives in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, where British troops were already stationed. By mid-1943, the campaign in North Africa had been won. The Allies then launched the invasion of Sicily in July 1943, and later invaded Italy in September 1943. By then, Soviet forces were on the offensive and had won a major victory at the Battle of Stalingrad. The decision to undertake a cross-channel invasion within the next year was taken at the Trident Conference in Washington in May 1943. Initial planning was constrained by the number of available landing craft, most of which were already committed in the Mediterranean and Pacific. At the Tehran Conference in November 1943, Roosevelt and Churchill promised Stalin that they would open the long-delayed second front in May 1944."
- Wikipedia.
The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
"The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
OMG!!!!
What nonsense.
Of course, Roosevelt lap-dogs have to claim that, or they can't explain Roosevelt's obeisance to Stalin.
Stalin was never.......never....going to lose to his former ally.
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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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
"....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)
By attacking in June,Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.
He didn't.
So far, you have not posted or shown what you refer to as "real history". You have posted and discussed conclusions of unproven conspiracy theories and rejected revisionism promoted by agenda driven entities like the John Birch Society.FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
Tin foil hat history doesn't count
PoliticalChics own links refute her outrageously fraudulent statement.I seriously doubt FDR ordered Hitler to invade the Soviet Union in order to have the Soviets do "90% of the fighting".
Each of your silly pronouncements surpasses the previous. You get a certain credit for constancy, I suppose.
In spite of Stalin's demands that we invade Europe as early as 1942, FDR held back on the invasion of France until June 1944. Every month that FDR held off invading cost Stalin tens of thousands of deaths and saved us thousands of deaths
"In late May 1942 the Soviet Union and the United States made a joint announcement that a "... full understanding was reached with regard to the urgent tasks of creating a second front in Europe in 1942." However, Churchill persuaded Roosevelt to postpone the promised invasion as, even with American help, the Allies did not have adequate forces for such a strike.
"Instead of an immediate return to France, the Western Allies staged offensives in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, where British troops were already stationed. By mid-1943, the campaign in North Africa had been won. The Allies then launched the invasion of Sicily in July 1943, and later invaded Italy in September 1943. By then, Soviet forces were on the offensive and had won a major victory at the Battle of Stalingrad. The decision to undertake a cross-channel invasion within the next year was taken at the Trident Conference in Washington in May 1943. Initial planning was constrained by the number of available landing craft, most of which were already committed in the Mediterranean and Pacific. At the Tehran Conference in November 1943, Roosevelt and Churchill promised Stalin that they would open the long-delayed second front in May 1944."
- Wikipedia.
The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
"The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
OMG!!!!
What nonsense.
Of course, Roosevelt lap-dogs have to claim that, or they can't explain Roosevelt's obeisance to Stalin.
Stalin was never.......never....going to lose to his former ally.
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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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
"....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)
By attacking in June,Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.
He didn't.
"Stalin was never.....nerver...going to lose to his former ally."
This is a great example of how cherry picking and distorting quotes can completely misinform and be twisted into a fraudulent claim.
The claim that the Soviet victory over Germany was a certainty is a foundation claim to support PoliticalChics many anti-FDR threads. It is a theory with no merit and not accepted by any historians. The fate of the outcome of the war between Germany and the USSR was an unknown and historians are in fundamental agreement that while the harsh Russian winter eventually played a role, its effects could have been avoided if not for Hitler's war changing blunders in splitting his Army and getting bogged down at Stalingrad.
As pointed out, PoliticalChics own link to Global Research confirms her ignorance or willful misleading on the topic. In addition, here are other sources to prove the ignorance or willful misleading in an effort to demonize FDR.
www.2worldwar2.com/when-hitler-lost.htm
historyplace.com/worldwar2/defeat/catastrophe-stalingrad.htm
So far, you have not posted or shown what you refer to as "real history". You have posted and discussed conclusions of unproven conspiracy theories and rejected revisionism promoted by agenda driven entities like the John Birch Society.FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
PoliticalChics own links refute her outrageously fraudulent statement.In spite of Stalin's demands that we invade Europe as early as 1942, FDR held back on the invasion of France until June 1944. Every month that FDR held off invading cost Stalin tens of thousands of deaths and saved us thousands of deaths
"In late May 1942 the Soviet Union and the United States made a joint announcement that a "... full understanding was reached with regard to the urgent tasks of creating a second front in Europe in 1942." However, Churchill persuaded Roosevelt to postpone the promised invasion as, even with American help, the Allies did not have adequate forces for such a strike.
"Instead of an immediate return to France, the Western Allies staged offensives in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, where British troops were already stationed. By mid-1943, the campaign in North Africa had been won. The Allies then launched the invasion of Sicily in July 1943, and later invaded Italy in September 1943. By then, Soviet forces were on the offensive and had won a major victory at the Battle of Stalingrad. The decision to undertake a cross-channel invasion within the next year was taken at the Trident Conference in Washington in May 1943. Initial planning was constrained by the number of available landing craft, most of which were already committed in the Mediterranean and Pacific. At the Tehran Conference in November 1943, Roosevelt and Churchill promised Stalin that they would open the long-delayed second front in May 1944."
- Wikipedia.
The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
"The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
OMG!!!!
What nonsense.
Of course, Roosevelt lap-dogs have to claim that, or they can't explain Roosevelt's obeisance to Stalin.
Stalin was never.......never....going to lose to his former ally.
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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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
"....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)
By attacking in June,Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.
He didn't.
"Stalin was never.....nerver...going to lose to his former ally."
This is a great example of how cherry picking and distorting quotes can completely misinform and be twisted into a fraudulent claim.
The claim that the Soviet victory over Germany was a certainty is a foundation claim to support PoliticalChics many anti-FDR threads. It is a theory with no merit and not accepted by any historians. The fate of the outcome of the war between Germany and the USSR was an unknown and historians are in fundamental agreement that while the harsh Russian winter eventually played a role, its effects could have been avoided if not for Hitler's war changing blunders in splitting his Army and getting bogged down at Stalingrad.
As pointed out, PoliticalChics own link to Global Research confirms her ignorance or willful misleading on the topic. In addition, here are other sources to prove the ignorance or willful misleading in an effort to demonize FDR.
www.2worldwar2.com/when-hitler-lost.htm
historyplace.com/worldwar2/defeat/catastrophe-stalingrad.htm
.. 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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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 Ussrin 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)
11. "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; andthe Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killedin the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”
Gads....so easy to prove you're a lying Roosevelt boot-licker.
You are repeating your trash instead of refuting my response to your nonsense. Read the entire link you have cherry picked from Global Research and or one or both of the links provided in my post and your distortion is overwhelmingly obvious. Dispute what virtually all recognized military and scholarly histories refer to as the Hitler blunder that led to Germany's defeat on the eastern front. Your predictions are speculative and in disagreement with acknowledged experts. You can not disagree with so many, in fact, all experts, and present your nonsense as fact. Winter played a role in the eventual defeat of Germany on the eastern front, but only because Hitler made the blunder of splitting his army and focusing on Stalingrad. That was the cause of the impact of winter on the German campaign. One can only speculate what would have happened if he had not split his forces and focused so much of it at the quagmire and stalemate at Stalingrad.PoliticalChics own links refute her outrageously fraudulent statement.In spite of Stalin's demands that we invade Europe as early as 1942, FDR held back on the invasion of France until June 1944. Every month that FDR held off invading cost Stalin tens of thousands of deaths and saved us thousands of deaths
"In late May 1942 the Soviet Union and the United States made a joint announcement that a "... full understanding was reached with regard to the urgent tasks of creating a second front in Europe in 1942." However, Churchill persuaded Roosevelt to postpone the promised invasion as, even with American help, the Allies did not have adequate forces for such a strike.
"Instead of an immediate return to France, the Western Allies staged offensives in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, where British troops were already stationed. By mid-1943, the campaign in North Africa had been won. The Allies then launched the invasion of Sicily in July 1943, and later invaded Italy in September 1943. By then, Soviet forces were on the offensive and had won a major victory at the Battle of Stalingrad. The decision to undertake a cross-channel invasion within the next year was taken at the Trident Conference in Washington in May 1943. Initial planning was constrained by the number of available landing craft, most of which were already committed in the Mediterranean and Pacific. At the Tehran Conference in November 1943, Roosevelt and Churchill promised Stalin that they would open the long-delayed second front in May 1944."
- Wikipedia.
The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
"The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
OMG!!!!
What nonsense.
Of course, Roosevelt lap-dogs have to claim that, or they can't explain Roosevelt's obeisance to Stalin.
Stalin was never.......never....going to lose to his former ally.
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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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
"....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)
By attacking in June,Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.
He didn't.
"Stalin was never.....nerver...going to lose to his former ally."
This is a great example of how cherry picking and distorting quotes can completely misinform and be twisted into a fraudulent claim.
The claim that the Soviet victory over Germany was a certainty is a foundation claim to support PoliticalChics many anti-FDR threads. It is a theory with no merit and not accepted by any historians. The fate of the outcome of the war between Germany and the USSR was an unknown and historians are in fundamental agreement that while the harsh Russian winter eventually played a role, its effects could have been avoided if not for Hitler's war changing blunders in splitting his Army and getting bogged down at Stalingrad.
As pointed out, PoliticalChics own link to Global Research confirms her ignorance or willful misleading on the topic. In addition, here are other sources to prove the ignorance or willful misleading in an effort to demonize FDR.
www.2worldwar2.com/when-hitler-lost.htm
historyplace.com/worldwar2/defeat/catastrophe-stalingrad.htm
.. 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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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 Ussrin 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)
11. "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; andthe Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killedin the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”
Gads....so easy to prove you're a lying Roosevelt boot-licker.
So far, you have not posted or shown what you refer to as "real history". You have posted and discussed conclusions of unproven conspiracy theories and rejected revisionism promoted by agenda driven entities like the John Birch Society.FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
'You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is
Are you surprised?
You are repeating your trash instead of refuting my response to your nonsense. Read the entire link you have cherry picked from Global Research and or one or both of the links provided in my post and your distortion is overwhelmingly obvious. Dispute what virtually all recognized military and scholarly histories refer to as the Hitler blunder that led to Germany's defeat on the eastern front. Your predictions are speculative and in disagreement with acknowledged experts. You can not disagree with so many, in fact, all experts, and present your nonsense as fact. Winter played a role in the eventual defeat of Germany on the eastern front, but only because Hitler made the blunder of splitting his army and focusing on Stalingrad. That was the cause of the impact of winter on the German campaign. One can only speculate what would have happened if he had not split his forces and focused so much of it at the quagmire and stalemate at Stalingrad.PoliticalChics own links refute her outrageously fraudulent statement."In late May 1942 the Soviet Union and the United States made a joint announcement that a "... full understanding was reached with regard to the urgent tasks of creating a second front in Europe in 1942." However, Churchill persuaded Roosevelt to postpone the promised invasion as, even with American help, the Allies did not have adequate forces for such a strike.
"Instead of an immediate return to France, the Western Allies staged offensives in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, where British troops were already stationed. By mid-1943, the campaign in North Africa had been won. The Allies then launched the invasion of Sicily in July 1943, and later invaded Italy in September 1943. By then, Soviet forces were on the offensive and had won a major victory at the Battle of Stalingrad. The decision to undertake a cross-channel invasion within the next year was taken at the Trident Conference in Washington in May 1943. Initial planning was constrained by the number of available landing craft, most of which were already committed in the Mediterranean and Pacific. At the Tehran Conference in November 1943, Roosevelt and Churchill promised Stalin that they would open the long-delayed second front in May 1944."
- Wikipedia.
The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
"The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
OMG!!!!
What nonsense.
Of course, Roosevelt lap-dogs have to claim that, or they can't explain Roosevelt's obeisance to Stalin.
Stalin was never.......never....going to lose to his former ally.
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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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
"....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)
By attacking in June,Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.
He didn't.
"Stalin was never.....nerver...going to lose to his former ally."
This is a great example of how cherry picking and distorting quotes can completely misinform and be twisted into a fraudulent claim.
The claim that the Soviet victory over Germany was a certainty is a foundation claim to support PoliticalChics many anti-FDR threads. It is a theory with no merit and not accepted by any historians. The fate of the outcome of the war between Germany and the USSR was an unknown and historians are in fundamental agreement that while the harsh Russian winter eventually played a role, its effects could have been avoided if not for Hitler's war changing blunders in splitting his Army and getting bogged down at Stalingrad.
As pointed out, PoliticalChics own link to Global Research confirms her ignorance or willful misleading on the topic. In addition, here are other sources to prove the ignorance or willful misleading in an effort to demonize FDR.
www.2worldwar2.com/when-hitler-lost.htm
historyplace.com/worldwar2/defeat/catastrophe-stalingrad.htm
.. 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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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 Ussrin 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)
11. "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; andthe Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killedin the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”
Gads....so easy to prove you're a lying Roosevelt boot-licker.
FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
Tin foil hat history doesn't count
Nothing "tinfoil hat" about it...it is the truth that isn't printed in school text books.
Hitler "blundered" nothing....he was not suppose to defeat Stalin. His orders by the Wall Street bankers was to prolong the war as long as possible and he did. He ended up dying of old age in Argentina having held up his end of the bargain. Do you really believe that Hitler died from a bullet wound that was self-inflicted in some bunker? What total bullshit. The Germans had technology that far surpassed anything any other country had...Admiral Byrd could testify to that when he was sent to flush out the rogue Nazi elements that were not a part of Operation Paperclip in Antarctica in 1947. Byrd and company left with their tails tucked beneath their legs.
So far, you have not posted or shown what you refer to as "real history". You have posted and discussed conclusions of unproven conspiracy theories and rejected revisionism promoted by agenda driven entities like the John Birch Society.FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
'You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is
Are you surprised?
Not really...just amazes me as to how people will cling to an ideology that is fraught with errors and delusion when real facts are introduced into the equation. I know, because I was a Bush backer and that is a period of my life that I wish I could take back.
FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 yearsWhy would conservatives or anyone try to rewrite history to show how they were outsmarted by FDR and the Democrats and continue to be outsmarted? Are we supposed to feel sorry for them because FDR was elected four times and historians always rate FDR always as one of the top three presidents?
Almost 80 years have gone by since FDR was elected the first time and Republicans are still running against FDR. Must of been a hell of a president to get that kind of following. Maybe it's the conservative "I think history" that's the culprit?
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
Tin foil hat history doesn't count
Nothing "tinfoil hat" about it...it is the truth that isn't printed in school text books.
Let me explain tinfoil hat history to you
People wear tinfoil hats to keep the evil gubmint from reading their thoughts. Your revisionist history involves our evil gubmint conspiring with the evil commies to sell out the world
I think tinfoil hat is an appropriate description of your historical perspective
You are evading and deflecting, as usual. I have been challenging you on a very specific claim you have made, and pointed out that the claim is one you have used as the base and foundation of many of your anti-FDR threads. I have used your own link and provided two others to show your complete distortion and fraudulent use of your quotes. You are insisting that the USSR was never in danger of losing to Germany in WWII. That is a ridiculous lie that you can not back up. You are only able to distort and take out of context random quotes to promote your nonsense at best, total willful misleading at worst.You are repeating your trash instead of refuting my response to your nonsense. Read the entire link you have cherry picked from Global Research and or one or both of the links provided in my post and your distortion is overwhelmingly obvious. Dispute what virtually all recognized military and scholarly histories refer to as the Hitler blunder that led to Germany's defeat on the eastern front. Your predictions are speculative and in disagreement with acknowledged experts. You can not disagree with so many, in fact, all experts, and present your nonsense as fact. Winter played a role in the eventual defeat of Germany on the eastern front, but only because Hitler made the blunder of splitting his army and focusing on Stalingrad. That was the cause of the impact of winter on the German campaign. One can only speculate what would have happened if he had not split his forces and focused so much of it at the quagmire and stalemate at Stalingrad.PoliticalChics own links refute her outrageously fraudulent statement.The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
"The fate of the Soviet Union hung in the balance at Stalingrad. They desperately needed our intervention
And still, FDR held back....waiting for the "right time"
OMG!!!!
What nonsense.
Of course, Roosevelt lap-dogs have to claim that, or they can't explain Roosevelt's obeisance to Stalin.
Stalin was never.......never....going to lose to his former ally.
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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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
"....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)
By attacking in June,Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.
He didn't.
"Stalin was never.....nerver...going to lose to his former ally."
This is a great example of how cherry picking and distorting quotes can completely misinform and be twisted into a fraudulent claim.
The claim that the Soviet victory over Germany was a certainty is a foundation claim to support PoliticalChics many anti-FDR threads. It is a theory with no merit and not accepted by any historians. The fate of the outcome of the war between Germany and the USSR was an unknown and historians are in fundamental agreement that while the harsh Russian winter eventually played a role, its effects could have been avoided if not for Hitler's war changing blunders in splitting his Army and getting bogged down at Stalingrad.
As pointed out, PoliticalChics own link to Global Research confirms her ignorance or willful misleading on the topic. In addition, here are other sources to prove the ignorance or willful misleading in an effort to demonize FDR.
www.2worldwar2.com/when-hitler-lost.htm
historyplace.com/worldwar2/defeat/catastrophe-stalingrad.htm
.. 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, albeitvery slowly, and by mid-Novembersome units found themselves at only 30 kilometers from the capital. But thetroops 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 Ussrin 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)
11. "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; andthe Red Army would end up claiming credit for 90 per cent of all Germans killedin the Second World War.)
Clive Ponting, 'Armageddon: The Second World War,' p. 130; Stephen E. Ambrose 'Americans at War,' p. 72. ”
Gads....so easy to prove you're a lying Roosevelt boot-licker.
Everything I post is accurate, correct, linked and sourced.
Your vitriol is totally understandable. You simply cannot admit, even to yourself, that you have been so fooled, for so many years, to accept and endorse the very same beliefs as Stalin, Hitler, and pretty much every totalitarian in modern history. Even when the proof is right before your eyes.
Understandable.....but effete.
Sure it wasn't 100 billion?FDR seized control of the government from the Republicans and the Dems didn't give it back for 20 years
Wisest decision our nation ever made
You have no idea how stupid and ironic your post is......and someone that knows the real history like I do, I find it hilarious as well.
Tin foil hat history doesn't count
Nothing "tinfoil hat" about it...it is the truth that isn't printed in school text books.
Let me explain tinfoil hat history to you
People wear tinfoil hats to keep the evil gubmint from reading their thoughts. Your revisionist history involves our evil gubmint conspiring with the evil commies to sell out the world
I think tinfoil hat is an appropriate description of your historical perspective
Too bad the 100 million slaughtered by the Soviets....your progenitors......didn't have even tin hats to protect them.
