FDR's Military Acumen Saved Soldiers?

[westwall]

"all historians think that Russia would have been defeated without our help" is an unfounded statement.

The Soviets simply would have kept withdrawing and moving their factories. They had done that before the USA entered the war.

However, if Hitler's scientists had developed an atomic weapon, yes, the Soviets eventually would have been defeated.

The US propped up the Soviets. We gave them 600,000 trucks and mobilized their army. We gave them thousands of aircraft and tanks and millions of tons of munitions. Had we not done that they would have been defeated by 1943. The Germans flat outfought them.

Yes they could move their factories but they would have had no fuel to transport the product anywhere. Fortunately the Germans made some critical errors early in the invasion or our support wouldn't have got to them in time.

Of course if one wants to look at the two governments there is no difference other than the Soviets managed to murder more of their population, they were co-invaders of Poland,
and post war they were even more destructive than the NAZI's were. In short there wasn't much difference between the two.

 

[westwall]

The truth is often simple.

You would rather have the Nazis take Europe than the communists take half of Europe.

No, you moron.....I would rather they both annihilated each other.

Amazing that that actual had to be said.

I can't decide which is your most annoying characteristic,.... littering, loitering, or living.

But they would not have done that, and you know it.

Thus, you would embrace the Nazis as so many of them hoped they would be by the West in later 1944 and 1945. They were as credulous then as you are now. You church party people are amazing, from the weirder parts of Opus Dei to the more insane cults of the reactionary Christian far right.

Hitler responsible for 6 million (not really but we'll use the accepted number) Jews and other "undesirables", Stalin Responsible for a minimum of 25 million.....mind telling me who's worse?

 

[whitehall]

FDR was dying when Marines were ordered to assault an impregnable fortress in the Pacific called Iwo Jima. The stated mission was to take the airfield and suppress Japanese fighter plane harassment of daylight bombings of Japan. The Navy promised weeks of bombing but gave the Marines about 3 days. After 6,000 Marines were killed in a month the mission statement was changed. The spin would be that the smelly island was taken to offer a place for crippled bombers to land. Where did they go before Iwo Jima was taken?

 

[JakeStarkey]

and the weakness of moral fiber continues as folks attack FDR, when, in fact, they would have been cheering him if they had been alive. But Whitehall is honest enough to let us know that he sympathized with the Nazis.

 

[westwall]

and the weakness of moral fiber continues as folks attack FDR, when, in fact, they would have been cheering him if they had been alive. But Whitehall is honest enough to let us know that he sympathized with the Nazis.

Any POTUS who violates the Constitution by placing a group of "undesirables" into concentration camps where thousands died is not one I would consider latching onto Jake.

There were three great socialist experiments run from the mid 1930's into the 1940's....EVERY ONE OF THEM resorted to concentration camps. A thinking person would consider that fact before one threw his lot in with ANYONE.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Whitehall continues to identify with fascism and the Nazis.

 

[jasonnfree]

and the weakness of moral fiber continues as folks attack FDR, when, in fact, they would have been cheering him if they had been alive. But Whitehall is honest enough to let us know that he sympathized with the Nazis.

Any POTUS who violates the Constitution by placing a group of "undesirables" into concentration camps where thousands died is not one I would consider latching onto Jake.

There were three great socialist experiments run from the mid 1930's into the 1940's....EVERY ONE OF THEM resorted to concentration camps. A thinking person would consider that fact before one threw his lot in with ANYONE.

Social security was a socialist experiment of the 30's and it didn't resort to concentration camps. It's successful to this day and cherished and used by both republicans and democrats. Now name one program that republicans ever came up with that didn't serve anybody but the wealthy and corporations.

 

[westwall]

and the weakness of moral fiber continues as folks attack FDR, when, in fact, they would have been cheering him if they had been alive. But Whitehall is honest enough to let us know that he sympathized with the Nazis.

Any POTUS who violates the Constitution by placing a group of "undesirables" into concentration camps where thousands died is not one I would consider latching onto Jake.

There were three great socialist experiments run from the mid 1930's into the 1940's....EVERY ONE OF THEM resorted to concentration camps. A thinking person would consider that fact before one threw his lot in with ANYONE.

Social security was a socialist experiment of the 30's and it didn't resort to concentration camps. It's successful to this day and cherished and used by both republicans and democrats. Now name one program that republicans ever came up with that didn't serve anybody but the wealthy and corporations.

How about the end of slavery? Or how about the end of racial segregation which the Democrats fought tooth and nail against? Or how about the EPA? Nixon of all people brought the EPA and NOAA into existence.

If you're going to remain an ignorant twerp do it somewhere else.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. Personal attacks in lieu of evidence?
2. The last date was before the mid 1930s.
3. My comments dealt with 1944 and 1945 and that
4. You wanted Nazi Germany to win the war against Communism.

Jakal....the human piñata.

 

[JakeStarkey]

PC, the reactionary social con revisionist

 

[Flopper]

Any POTUS who violates the Constitution by placing a group of "undesirables" into concentration camps where thousands died is not one I would consider latching onto Jake.

There were three great socialist experiments run from the mid 1930's into the 1940's....EVERY ONE OF THEM resorted to concentration camps. A thinking person would consider that fact before one threw his lot in with ANYONE.

Social security was a socialist experiment of the 30's and it didn't resort to concentration camps. It's successful to this day and cherished and used by both republicans and democrats. Now name one program that republicans ever came up with that didn't serve anybody but the wealthy and corporations.

How about the end of slavery? Or how about the end of racial segregation which the Democrats fought tooth and nail against? Or how about the EPA? Nixon of all people brought the EPA and NOAA into existence.

If you're going to remain an ignorant twerp do it somewhere else.

Southern Democrats fraught to keep segregation alive. Northern Democrats did not. In fact their support of blacks cost them the South. Both Republicans and Democrats have strongly supported the EPA until recent years.

 

[PoliticalChic]

and the weakness of moral fiber continues as folks attack FDR, when, in fact, they would have been cheering him if they had been alive. But Whitehall is honest enough to let us know that he sympathized with the Nazis.

Any POTUS who violates the Constitution by placing a group of "undesirables" into concentration camps where thousands died is not one I would consider latching onto Jake.

There were three great socialist experiments run from the mid 1930's into the 1940's....EVERY ONE OF THEM resorted to concentration camps. A thinking person would consider that fact before one threw his lot in with ANYONE.

Social security was a socialist experiment of the 30's and it didn't resort to concentration camps. It's successful to this day and cherished and used by both republicans and democrats. Now name one program that republicans ever came up with that didn't serve anybody but the wealthy and corporations.

1. Did you find that the Constitution, article 1, section 8, the enumerated powers, covers Social Security?
And, if not, why wasn't the amendment process used to allow same?



2. The Social Security plan was that workers would pay for retirees, and, based on actuarial tables, those who died earlier than expected would add to the fund.
a. No one considered that life expectancy would increase?
b. No one considered that the balance of workers and retirees might change?
c. No one calculated the long-term costs?
d. Ida May Fuller, the first person to begin receiving benefits, in January, 1940, when she was 65- she lived to be 100. “…worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.” Social Security History




3. " Now name one program that republicans ever came up with that didn't serve anybody but the wealthy and corporations."

So simple that it competes with you for simplicity, IntellectFree!

a. The EITC has a sterling Republican heritage. It was first instituted in the 1920s by a Republican Congress at the instigation of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. Repealed in 1943, Republican President Gerald Ford revived it in 1975.

b. EITC supporters argued that because the credit would be available only to those with earned income, it would reinforce work incentives and help get people off welfare. By making the credit refundable, it would offset the disincentive effects of higher payroll tax rates, which had risen from 4.8 percent on workers and employers in 1970 to 5.85 percent in 1975.

c. In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan supported a big increase in the EITC rate from 10 percent to 14 percent. In 1990, George H.W. Bush supported a further increase.

d. Despite the exploding cost of the EITC, Republicans in Congress created another tax credit in the 1997 tax bill. The child credit was intended to make it easier for mothers to stay at home and raise their children, rather than work outside the home. Republicans and the Earned Income Tax Credit - Bruce Bartlett - Page full


e. “…the earned income tax credit ("EITC") that was enacted by Gerald Ford and then re-enacted and expanded in 1986 by... could it be, don't tell me, say it ain't so!... Ronald Reagan.”
Paul Abrams: Reagan the Redistributor: Check Out the Earned Income Tax Credit


f. Recent Census data show that among working families, the EITC lifts substantially more children out of poverty than any other government program or category of programs. New Research Findings on the Effects of the Earned Income Tax Credit



Are you going to remain stupid your entire life? Why don't you take a day off.

 

[JakeStarkey]

PC wishes she lived in the 1930s and has a horrible time adjusting to the fact she lives eighty years later.

Her Mises interpretation is poor and grows quite stale in five minutes.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Social security was a socialist experiment of the 30's and it didn't resort to concentration camps. It's successful to this day and cherished and used by both republicans and democrats. Now name one program that republicans ever came up with that didn't serve anybody but the wealthy and corporations.

How about the end of slavery? Or how about the end of racial segregation which the Democrats fought tooth and nail against? Or how about the EPA? Nixon of all people brought the EPA and NOAA into existence.

If you're going to remain an ignorant twerp do it somewhere else.

Southern Democrats fraught to keep segregation alive. Northern Democrats did not. In fact their support of blacks cost them the South. Both Republicans and Democrats have strongly supported the EPA until recent years.

"In fact their support of blacks cost them [Democrats] the South."

Utter nonsense.

No doubt you learned same at the feet of a Liberal school marm.



1. Liberal neurotic obsession with this apocryphal notion- it’s been cited hundreds of times in the NYTimes- is supposed to explain why Democrats can’t get nice churchgoing, patriotic southerners to vote for the party of antiwar protesters, abortion, the ACLU and gay marriage.

a. They tell themselves it’s because they won’t stoop to pander to a bunch of racists. This slander should probably be the first clue as to why southerners don’t like them.

b. The central premise of this folklore is that anyone who votes Republican is a racist. Pretty sophisticated thinking.





2. Second, the South kept voting for Democrats for decades after that 1964 act. And, btw, Democrats continued to win a plurality of votes in southern congressional elections for the next 30 years…right up to 1994.
"GOP Poised to Reap Redistricting Rewards" by Michael Barone on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent

a. Between ’48 and ’88, Republicans never won a majority of the Dixiecrat states, outside of two 49-state landslides. Any loses in the South are directly attributable to their championing abortion, gays in the military, Christian-bashing, springing criminals, attacks on guns, dovish foreign policy, ‘save the whales/kill the humans environmentalism….certainly not race!

b. Rather than the Republicans winning the Dixiecrat vote, the Dixiecrats simply died out. By contrast, Democrats kept winning the alleged “segregationist” states into the ‘90’s. If states were voting for Goldwater out of racism, what of Carter’s 1976 sweep of all the Goldwater states?

Covered fully in "Mugged," Coulter.



Hint:
Know why they were called 'Dixiecrats,' not 'Republicrats' or 'Dixiecans'?


Did you know that Senate Democrats blocked every anti-lynching bill the Republicans offered?
True story.



Too late for you to learn?

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC wishes she lived in the 1930s and has a horrible time adjusting to the fact she lives eighty years later.

Her Mises interpretation is poor and grows quite stale in five minutes.

Psst....

....think anyone will notice that you are never able to contest the facts that I post....and always make your insipid attempts at rebuttal about my fav subject, moi?


Those that do probably believe you to be an imbecile.
A very, very, lonely imbecile.



Don't ever change.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC wishes she lived in the 1930s and has a horrible time adjusting to the fact she lives eighty years later.

Her Mises interpretation is poor and grows quite stale in five minutes.

Style hint.

There's probably no chance of making your posts more interesting, as you have all the charisma of Harry Reid.....

But If I were suggesting someone enjoyed living in the past, I'd quote a passage from "Miniever Cheevy" and make some comparison.

For your edification:

Miniver Cheevy, child of scorn,
Grew lean while he assailed the seasons;
He wept that he was ever born,
And he had reasons.

Miniver loved the days of old
When swords were bright and steeds were prancing;
The vision of a warrior bold
Would set him dancing.

Miniver sighed for what was not,
And dreamed, and rested from his labors;
He dreamed of Thebes and Camelot,
And Priam’s neighbors.

Miniver mourned the ripe renown
That made so many a name so fragrant;
He mourned Romance, now on the town,
And Art, a vagrant.

Miniver loved the Medici,
Albeit he had never seen one;
He would have sinned incessantly
Could he have been one.

Miniver cursed the commonplace
And eyed a khaki suit with loathing;
He missed the mediæval grace
Of iron clothing.

Miniver scorned the gold he sought,
But sore annoyed was he without it;
Miniver thought, and thought, and thought,
And thought about it.

Miniver Cheevy, born too late,
Scratched his head and kept on thinking;
Miniver coughed, and called it fate,
And kept on drinking.
By Edwin Arlington Robinson

 

[JakeStarkey]

In other words, PC gives us, admits she has lost, and slinks away.



Nothing new here.

 

[PoliticalChic]

In other words, PC gives us, admits she has lost, and slinks away.



Nothing new here.

Actually....Jakal got the drubbing he deserved, and posts more lies.

 

[JakeStarkey]

In other words, PC gives us, admits she has lost, and slinks away.



Nothing new here.

Actually....Jakal got the drubbing he deserved, and posts more lies.

slinky PC.

 

[Spoonman]

So....one of my buds, having a deep an abiding love of President Franklin Roosevelt...no matter what!.....

...now claims the following for his idol:
" ...hundreds of thousands of American soldiers remained alive,..."

Any who believe that FDR's decisions saved American soldiers would do well to read the following:


The bulk of our international problems stem directly from the intentions, strategy, actions, of President Franklin Roosevelt.
Had he not supported and inflated the USSR, there would not have been a Red China.
Nor a Korean War.
But the issue has revolved around whether the Left's icon was misguided, or intended the deleterious political philosophy.




1. In August of 1943, Roosevelt and Churchill met in Quebec. Stalin was not present. "Churchill advocated that the allies open the second front in Europe through the Balkans” – as Churchill described it, the “soft underbelly of Europe.” This would prevent a Soviet rush into that area, avoiding the permanent establish of the authority of the Soviet Union in this region, potentially saving much of Central Europe from Soviet tyranny. General Wedemeyer conveys Roosevelt’s view on this notion:
…The President then added the curious statement that he did not understand the British viewpoint in this connection, for he, Roosevelt, did not believe that the Soviets wanted to take over the Balkan states but wished only to establish “kinship with other Slavic peoples.”
Roosevelt's BFF ?Uncle Joe? ?



a. How could he have believed this? In 1937-1938, at the height of his pal, 'Uncle Joe' Stalin's terror, 40,000 were killed per month at Stalin's behest. Full text of "Solzhenitsyn: The Voice of Freedom"

b. In November-December, the two leaders met with Stalin....who refused the Churchill plan....and demanded the second front through the West.




2. General Mark Clark was, at the time, in command of Allied Armies in Italy. He strongly supported the Prime Minister’s viewpoint, as indicated in his book written after the war:
…A campaign that might have changed the whole history of relations between the Western world and Soviet Russia was permitted to fade away….Not alone in my opinion, but in the opinion of a number of experts who were close to the problem, the weakening of the campaign in Italy in order to invade southern France and instead of pushing on in the Balkans was one of the outstanding political mistakes of the war.…Had we been there before the Red Army, not only would the collapse of Germany have come sooner, but the influence of Soviet Russia would have been drastically reduced.




3. Upon his return to the U. S. from Cairo and Tehran, Roosevelt delivered a radio address. Regarding Stalin, Roosevelt said:
To use an American and somewhat ungrammatical colloquialism, I may say that “I got along fine” with Marshall Stalin…I believe we are going to get along very well with him and the Russian people – very well indeed….
Roosevelt's BFF ?Uncle Joe? ?





4. "What did he know, and when did he know it."

a. The Great Purge revelations from Soviet archives, historians now estimate that nearly 700,000 people (353,074 in 1937 and 328,612 in 1938) were executed in the course of the terror, with the great mass of victims merely "ordinary" Soviet citizens: workers, peasants, homemakers, teachers, priests, musicians, soldiers, pensioners, ballerinas, beggars.

b. The Ukrainian Famine 1932–1933...estimated at between 5 and 10 million people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin

c. Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, set in motion events designed to cause a famine in the Ukraine to destroy the people there seeking independence from his rule.
The History Place - Genocide in the 20th Century: Stalin's Forced Famine 1932-33


"I believe we are going to get along very well with him .... – very well indeed…."



If the collapse of Germany have come sooner....think that would have saved American lives?
And the Korean War....36,940 Americans killed, 91,134 wounded, and 8,176 still missing.

I guess BFF Uncle Joe was simply more important....

FDR gave eastern Europe to stalin. The Soviets fought when attacked, i'll give them that, but as the tide of the war started to turn, their objective was no longer winning the war, it was securing territory. in fact, they preferred the war didn't end and Europe remain in turmoil while they territory grabbed.