Ken Burns Roosevelt Documentary

[PoliticalChic]

I've been very specific, with actual words from those who knew the truth....

Why are you certain that they knew the truth rather than giving their opinions?

That suggestion I made about research?

You should consider it.

All you are doing is cut and pasting the opinions of people who disagreed with FDR.

A 75 year old opinion is still just an opinion. It's not wine, getting better with age.

The irony is that your post applies more accurately to what you 'learn' about Franklin Roosevelt.

Again....research.

I provide links and sources so that you may do exactly that.

You provide links to OPINIONS.

Your sources all give their OPINIONS.

You never provide links to vettable, provable FACTS.

You really don't understand history, do you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Really? Then explain how Stalin had any authority over FDR.

They were soul-mates.

1. He gave official recognition to Stalin in 1933

As leader of the Soviet Union? He was. Why not recognize that FACT?

Which countries did NOT recognize Stalin as the leader of the USSR?

2. He provided lend lease largesse to Stalin far and above what was necessary

Who says? ( and whomever you name, that would be their OPINION.)

3. He allowed and encouraged Stalin's spies in his administration.

If that's a factual statement, then back it up with news accounts from the era. Or anything that isn't an OPINION.

4. He insisted on a communist as his second vice president

OK, prove that.

5. He sent uranium and plans for the atomic bomb to Stalin

Prove that with a fact-based link to uncovered or declassified documents from the U.S. government. Because that's the only way that could be proven.

6. All of this with the foreknowledge that Stalin was a homicidal psychopath.

What does that say about Fred Koch?

7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.

Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't.

What is your explanation for the above?

And...if your did your own research, and verified same....would you have had the courage to ask your history teachers/professors to explain their support of FDR in the face of these facts?

Would you?

They are not FACTS! For fuck's sake!


Now, after all that tap-dancing, answer the question you are avoiding:

How did Stalin have any authority over FDR?

I predict that you will punt again.

1.
1. He gave official recognition to Stalin in 1933[/quote]

As leader of the Soviet Union? He was. Why not recognize that FACT?"

"Four Presidents and their six Secretaries of State for over a decade and a half held to this resolve," i.e., refusal to recognize the Soviet government. That was written by Herbert Hoover, one of those four Presidents. He wrote it in his Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover's Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermathby George H. Nash, published posthumously, obviously, in 2011, pg 24-29.




"

4. He insisted on a communist as his second vice president

OK, prove that.

"....the rest of his party's fervent opposition to his selection, Wallace was shoehorned into office by F.D.R., who made his running mate an economic policy czar and a key foreign emissary. Though he was a ardent believer in mankind's inherent goodness, Wallace couldn't elicit goodwill from his colleagues, ...

In 1944, the Democrats bypassed Wallace to select Harry S. Truman as their vice-presidential nominee. Wallace was named Secretary of Commerce, where he feuded bitterly with Truman — who had by then ascended to the Oval Office — over the nation's confrontational posturing with the Soviet Union, which the agricultural expert deemed dangerously hawkish. The clash earned Wallace a reputation among his detractors as a "Stalinist stooge." Alienated but undeterred, he mounted a run for the presidency in 1947. One writer later termed his candidacy "the closest the Soviet Union ever came to actually choosing a president of the United States." Henry Wallace - America s Worst Vice Presidents - TIME

3. He allowed and encouraged Stalin's spies in his administration.

If that's a factual statement, then back it up with news accounts from the era. Or anything that isn't an OPINION.

a. “On September 2, 1939, the day after the outbreak of war in Europe, Whittaker Chambers had told much of what he knew about Soviet espionage in the United States to Adolph Berle, Assistant Secretary of State and President’s Roosevelt’s advisor on internal security. Immediately afterwards, Berle drew up a memorandum for the President which listed Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White and the other leading for whom Chambers acted as courier. One was a leading presidential aide, Lauchlin Currie….Roosevelt, however, was not interested. He seems to have dismissed the whole idea of espionage rings within his administration as absurd.” ‘The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archives, the History of the KGB,” by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin.p.107

b. 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 the free encyclopedia) And, of course, all doubt was removed in 1995, when the Venona Soviet cables were decrypted.



When ever you’re ready just yell “check please.”

 

[Claudette]

Burns is good at these documentaries. Most of the Roosevelt stuff I've seen many times, so none of it is new, but it's nice to have it gathered in all together like that and in sequence and narrated.

I agree.

I watched this show, loved it. But I was left wondering about the media NOW. TMZ and every paparazzi under god's green earth would have shouted out every failure, every indiscretion and the fact FDR had a physical disability since 1921....Why did the media have so much discretion then and none NOW?

I agree. The media then would never print anything detremental to the POTUS.

Today Roosevelt would be out on his ass for all of his infidelities. Same goes for Kennedy.

Wonder if Burns will be mentioning those little factoids in his documentary??

Roosevelt was a great war time Prez but he did nothing to end the great depression. In fact the things he did do extended that depression. He wasn't as great as some would like to believe.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Really? Then explain how Stalin had any authority over FDR.

They were soul-mates.

1. He gave official recognition to Stalin in 1933

As leader of the Soviet Union? He was. Why not recognize that FACT?

Which countries did NOT recognize Stalin as the leader of the USSR?

2. He provided lend lease largesse to Stalin far and above what was necessary

Who says? ( and whomever you name, that would be their OPINION.)

3. He allowed and encouraged Stalin's spies in his administration.

If that's a factual statement, then back it up with news accounts from the era. Or anything that isn't an OPINION.

4. He insisted on a communist as his second vice president

OK, prove that.

5. He sent uranium and plans for the atomic bomb to Stalin

Prove that with a fact-based link to uncovered or declassified documents from the U.S. government. Because that's the only way that could be proven.

6. All of this with the foreknowledge that Stalin was a homicidal psychopath.

What does that say about Fred Koch?

7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.

Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't.

What is your explanation for the above?

And...if your did your own research, and verified same....would you have had the courage to ask your history teachers/professors to explain their support of FDR in the face of these facts?

Would you?

They are not FACTS! For fuck's sake!


Now, after all that tap-dancing, answer the question you are avoiding:

How did Stalin have any authority over FDR?

I predict that you will punt again.

"7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.
Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't."



Of course I can.

Everything I post is factual and correct.


Stalin insisted that D-Day be via western France....he wanted, and got, all of Eastern Europe under his control. So...he dissuaded FDR from an attack via Italy.

1. As to the question of Eisenhower's preference in attacking Fortress Europa, he stated in 1948: "My own recommendation, then as always, was that no operation should be taken in the Mediterranean except as a directly supporting move for the Channel attack and our planned deployment [of troops out of Italy] should proceed with all possible speed." Eisenhower, "Crusade in Europe," p.198-200

That was after FDR told him what to say.
But, his view before that.......

a. But, in 1943, before he was offered another star:
"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO.In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

" In December 1943, it was announced that Eisenhower would be Supreme Allied Commander in Europe."Military career of Dwight D. Eisenhower - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



2. "The actual plans for the invasion of Europe "was the brain child of the United States army," meaning General Eisenhower, a Marshall protégé, who was in charge of the planning (according to Stimson's book, "On Active Service in Peace and War").

The evidence is conclusive, however, that if Eisenhower's ideas had not been in full accord with those conceived before the war by Marshall and Hopkins, the planning assignment, the supreme command of the allied expeditionary forces, and the five stars that adorned his shoulders would have gone to some other general.
"The Twenty Year Revolution," p.119, Manly



So....Eisenhower was for it (attack via Italy) before he was against it (suddenly for attack via France,)




How's that? In your face!

 

[Statistikhengst]

However, the Soviet Union first started falling apart in 1990-1991...

Wrong.

It is right. The actual splitting of the former Soviet Union happened in 1990-1992.

 

[gipper]

Really? Then explain how Stalin had any authority over FDR.

They were soul-mates.

1. He gave official recognition to Stalin in 1933

As leader of the Soviet Union? He was. Why not recognize that FACT?

Which countries did NOT recognize Stalin as the leader of the USSR?

2. He provided lend lease largesse to Stalin far and above what was necessary

Who says? ( and whomever you name, that would be their OPINION.)

3. He allowed and encouraged Stalin's spies in his administration.

If that's a factual statement, then back it up with news accounts from the era. Or anything that isn't an OPINION.

4. He insisted on a communist as his second vice president

OK, prove that.

5. He sent uranium and plans for the atomic bomb to Stalin

Prove that with a fact-based link to uncovered or declassified documents from the U.S. government. Because that's the only way that could be proven.

6. All of this with the foreknowledge that Stalin was a homicidal psychopath.

What does that say about Fred Koch?

7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.

Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't.

What is your explanation for the above?

And...if your did your own research, and verified same....would you have had the courage to ask your history teachers/professors to explain their support of FDR in the face of these facts?

Would you?

They are not FACTS! For fuck's sake!


Now, after all that tap-dancing, answer the question you are avoiding:

How did Stalin have any authority over FDR?

I predict that you will punt again.

"7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.
Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't."



Of course I can.

Everything I post is factual and correct.


Stalin insisted that D-Day be via western France....he wanted, and got, all of Eastern Europe under his control. So...he dissuaged FDR from an attack via Italy.

1. As to the question of Eisenhower's preference in attacking Fortress Europa, he stated in 1948: "My own recommendation, then as always, was that no operation should be taken in the Mediterranean except as a directly supporting move for the Channel attack and our planned deployment [of troops out of Italy] should proceed with all possible speed." Eisenhower, "Crusade in Europe," p.198-200

That was after FDR told him what to say.
But, his view before that.......

a. But, in 1943, before he was offered another star:
"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO.In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

" In December 1943, it was announced that Eisenhower would be Supreme Allied Commander in Europe."Military career of Dwight D. Eisenhower - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



2. "The actual plans for the invasion of Europe "was the brain child of the United States army," meaning General Eisenhower, a Marshall protégé, who was in charge of the planning (according to Stimson's book, "On Active Service in Peace and War").

The evidence is conclusive, however, that if Eisenhower's ideas had not been in full accord with those conceived before the war by Marshall and Hopkins, the planning assignment, the supreme command of the allied expeditionary forces, and the five stars that adorned his shoulders would have gone to some other general.
"The Twenty Year Revolution," p.119, Manly



So....Eisenhower was for it (attack via Italy) before he was against it (suddenly for attack via France,)




How's that? In your face!

Until we find a picture of FDR on his knees in front of Stalin, kissing his.....ring....or something else...the dupes will never accept all the evidence proving FDR was Stalin's stooge.

The dupes are beloved by the power elite, because they know they can fool them repeatedly.

 

[Unkotare]

However, the Soviet Union first started falling apart in 1990-1991...

Wrong.

It is right. The actual splitting of the former Soviet Union happened in 1990-1992.

"First started falling apart in..."

 

[peach174]

Get out and travel a bit all you FDR detractors. His public works projects built thousands of beautiful post offices, court houses, and thousands of beautiful campgrounds for which I will ever be grateful. He put millions of people to work, including painters, writers, and poets. And look at the quality of what all those people produced. For his day, FDR probably pumped more American dollars back into America than any other president. His legacy is secure. He was a great president who loved this country. He didn't poison the wells like latter day democrat presidents. There was nothing hateful about the man.

Then why did he want to pack the court?

The documentary explains it. He had just gotten millions of Americans back to work with his list of alphabet agencies and we were starting to come out of the Depression. The Right-Wingers on the court wanted to nullify these agencies by ruling that his creation of them was unconstitutional.

We were not starting to come out of the Depression. His programs prolonged the depression.
It wasn't just the right wingers. Three of the 6 New Deals were ruled 9 to 0 and they were unconstitutional.
If you watched the documentary one of the women close to him said "You mean pack the Court" and he agreed with her.
The majority of the people were appalled by him wanting to do it.
He was a typical progressive liberal who forced his unconstitutional views on Americans by executive orders. Sounds familiar huh?
What were the executive orders that forced the American people?
In executive orders he unconstitutionally forced American citizens of Japanese decent into "internment camps", he forced American businesses to fix prices and wages and confiscated gold which was the private property of American citizens and forced them to "sell" it to the US government which then melted the coins into bars and sold them at a profit. FDR of course didn't want these things to be looked at and overruled by the Supreme Court so he sought to "pack" the supreme court with his allies who would allow all of his unconstitutional legislation to remain law.

 

[BullKurtz]

And here we have the USMB version of "common core" ie revisionist history, ladies and gents. The leftists have their own version of everything that's been done to keep them from power, and repair what they did while in power. They tend to like liars with a nice smile, politicians instead of statesmen. They revel in the fact their heroes make a career of politics instead of in the marketplace of competition. Nepotism, waiting one's turn for higher office, backroom deals enforced by neighborhood thugs....that's the Rat party. Leftists can't compete so they strive to be the referees of the game. What you see above is the art of lying to the face of truth....they'll shape any event or leader to fit their narrow definition of history....and they never rest, which is why we can never rest and must strive to correct and defeat them.

 

[Discombobulated]

Your shallow, politically oriented, web based, pop culture revisionist history could never produce anything like a cogent argument.

Let's see you try to answer post #133.....ripped you a new one, huh?


It’s too bad stupidity isn’t painful.

You have yet to establish your hair brained theory about how FDRs policies prolonged the Second World War. I've already dispensed with post #133 as superficial nonsense.

Liar.


How to address you...other than as an insult to the bottom of the barrel.

You'll have to do better than that if you want to re-write history.

Get lost, liar

Had you ever actually read a book you might not look quite as stupid as you do now.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's see you try to answer post #133.....ripped you a new one, huh?


It’s too bad stupidity isn’t painful.

You have yet to establish your hair brained theory about how FDRs policies prolonged the Second World War. I've already dispensed with post #133 as superficial nonsense.

Liar.


How to address you...other than as an insult to the bottom of the barrel.

You'll have to do better than that if you want to re-write history.

Get lost, liar

Had you ever actually read a book you might not look quite as stupid as you do now.

Get lost, liar.

 

[Discombobulated]

You have yet to establish your hair brained theory about how FDRs policies prolonged the Second World War. I've already dispensed with post #133 as superficial nonsense.

Liar.


How to address you...other than as an insult to the bottom of the barrel.

You'll have to do better than that if you want to re-write history.

Get lost, liar

Had you ever actually read a book you might not look quite as stupid as you do now.

Get lost, liar.

You really are just about as ignorant as you can possibly be.

 

[regent]

Get out and travel a bit all you FDR detractors. His public works projects built thousands of beautiful post offices, court houses, and thousands of beautiful campgrounds for which I will ever be grateful. He put millions of people to work, including painters, writers, and poets. And look at the quality of what all those people produced. For his day, FDR probably pumped more American dollars back into America than any other president. His legacy is secure. He was a great president who loved this country. He didn't poison the wells like latter day democrat presidents. There was nothing hateful about the man.

I think few people realize just how many public projects were completed by the WPA. So much of what you read is about waste, costs, delays, and mistakes. However, the American infrastructure was effective rebuilt providing American the backbone it would needed to support the war effort. The WPA built or improved 651,000 miles of roads, built, repaired, or improved 124,011 bridges 19,700 miles of water mains and 500 water treatment plants. Workers built 24,000 miles of sidewalks; 12,800 playgrounds; 24,000 miles of storm and sewer lines; 1200 airport buildings; 226 hospitals; and more than 5,900 schools.

Other notable public works projects included the Hoover Damn, Grand Coulee Damn, the Overseas Highway that connects Miami and Key West, the Lincoln Tunnel, the Blue Ridge Parkway, the Triborough Bridge, and LaGuardia Airport.

Also, the Empire State Building, the Tennessee Valley Authority, Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, Shasta Dam in California, and the nation's first freeway in Los Angeles.

What the fuck did Ronald Reagan ever build?

Hmmm...ask the East Germans, and the Poles, and the Lithuanians, and the Latvians, and the Estonians, and...well, you get the picture...I hope. Hope! That's what Ronald Reagan built. Hope!

Well, maybe some hope, but a lot more debt than hope. Reagan managed to triple the debt.

 

[BullKurtz]

Get out and travel a bit all you FDR detractors. His public works projects built thousands of beautiful post offices, court houses, and thousands of beautiful campgrounds for which I will ever be grateful. He put millions of people to work, including painters, writers, and poets. And look at the quality of what all those people produced. For his day, FDR probably pumped more American dollars back into America than any other president. His legacy is secure. He was a great president who loved this country. He didn't poison the wells like latter day democrat presidents. There was nothing hateful about the man.

I think few people realize just how many public projects were completed by the WPA. So much of what you read is about waste, costs, delays, and mistakes. However, the American infrastructure was effective rebuilt providing American the backbone it would needed to support the war effort. The WPA built or improved 651,000 miles of roads, built, repaired, or improved 124,011 bridges 19,700 miles of water mains and 500 water treatment plants. Workers built 24,000 miles of sidewalks; 12,800 playgrounds; 24,000 miles of storm and sewer lines; 1200 airport buildings; 226 hospitals; and more than 5,900 schools.

Other notable public works projects included the Hoover Damn, Grand Coulee Damn, the Overseas Highway that connects Miami and Key West, the Lincoln Tunnel, the Blue Ridge Parkway, the Triborough Bridge, and LaGuardia Airport.

Also, the Empire State Building, the Tennessee Valley Authority, Golden Gate Bridge and the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, Shasta Dam in California, and the nation's first freeway in Los Angeles.

What the fuck did Ronald Reagan ever build?

Hmmm...ask the East Germans, and the Poles, and the Lithuanians, and the Latvians, and the Estonians, and...well, you get the picture...I hope. Hope! That's what Ronald Reagan built. Hope!

Well, maybe some hope, but a lot more debt than hope. Reagan managed to triple the debt.

You're a lying sack of shit.

 

[Discombobulated]

Really? Then explain how Stalin had any authority over FDR.

They were soul-mates.

1. He gave official recognition to Stalin in 1933

As leader of the Soviet Union? He was. Why not recognize that FACT?

Which countries did NOT recognize Stalin as the leader of the USSR?

2. He provided lend lease largesse to Stalin far and above what was necessary

Who says? ( and whomever you name, that would be their OPINION.)

3. He allowed and encouraged Stalin's spies in his administration.

If that's a factual statement, then back it up with news accounts from the era. Or anything that isn't an OPINION.

4. He insisted on a communist as his second vice president

OK, prove that.

5. He sent uranium and plans for the atomic bomb to Stalin

Prove that with a fact-based link to uncovered or declassified documents from the U.S. government. Because that's the only way that could be proven.

6. All of this with the foreknowledge that Stalin was a homicidal psychopath.

What does that say about Fred Koch?

7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.

Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't.

What is your explanation for the above?

And...if your did your own research, and verified same....would you have had the courage to ask your history teachers/professors to explain their support of FDR in the face of these facts?

Would you?

They are not FACTS! For fuck's sake!


Now, after all that tap-dancing, answer the question you are avoiding:

How did Stalin have any authority over FDR?

I predict that you will punt again.

"7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.
Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't."



Of course I can.

Everything I post is factual and correct.


Stalin insisted that D-Day be via western France....he wanted, and got, all of Eastern Europe under his control. So...he dissuaded FDR from an attack via Italy.

1. As to the question of Eisenhower's preference in attacking Fortress Europa, he stated in 1948: "My own recommendation, then as always, was that no operation should be taken in the Mediterranean except as a directly supporting move for the Channel attack and our planned deployment [of troops out of Italy] should proceed with all possible speed." Eisenhower, "Crusade in Europe," p.198-200

That was after FDR told him what to say.
But, his view before that.......

a. But, in 1943, before he was offered another star:
"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO.In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

" In December 1943, it was announced that Eisenhower would be Supreme Allied Commander in Europe."Military career of Dwight D. Eisenhower - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



2. "The actual plans for the invasion of Europe "was the brain child of the United States army," meaning General Eisenhower, a Marshall protégé, who was in charge of the planning (according to Stimson's book, "On Active Service in Peace and War").

The evidence is conclusive, however, that if Eisenhower's ideas had not been in full accord with those conceived before the war by Marshall and Hopkins, the planning assignment, the supreme command of the allied expeditionary forces, and the five stars that adorned his shoulders would have gone to some other general.
"The Twenty Year Revolution," p.119, Manly



So....Eisenhower was for it (attack via Italy) before he was against it (suddenly for attack via France,)




How's that? In your face!

You have no idea what any of this means. Italy was always the secondary diversionary front, invading France was always going to be the main effort. No one thought Germany was going to be conquered via Italy. No one.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Really? Then explain how Stalin had any authority over FDR.

They were soul-mates.

1. He gave official recognition to Stalin in 1933

As leader of the Soviet Union? He was. Why not recognize that FACT?

Which countries did NOT recognize Stalin as the leader of the USSR?

2. He provided lend lease largesse to Stalin far and above what was necessary

Who says? ( and whomever you name, that would be their OPINION.)

3. He allowed and encouraged Stalin's spies in his administration.

If that's a factual statement, then back it up with news accounts from the era. Or anything that isn't an OPINION.

4. He insisted on a communist as his second vice president

OK, prove that.

5. He sent uranium and plans for the atomic bomb to Stalin

Prove that with a fact-based link to uncovered or declassified documents from the U.S. government. Because that's the only way that could be proven.

6. All of this with the foreknowledge that Stalin was a homicidal psychopath.

What does that say about Fred Koch?

7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.

Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't.

What is your explanation for the above?

And...if your did your own research, and verified same....would you have had the courage to ask your history teachers/professors to explain their support of FDR in the face of these facts?

Would you?

They are not FACTS! For fuck's sake!


Now, after all that tap-dancing, answer the question you are avoiding:

How did Stalin have any authority over FDR?

I predict that you will punt again.

"7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.
Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't."



Of course I can.

Everything I post is factual and correct.


Stalin insisted that D-Day be via western France....he wanted, and got, all of Eastern Europe under his control. So...he dissuaded FDR from an attack via Italy.

1. As to the question of Eisenhower's preference in attacking Fortress Europa, he stated in 1948: "My own recommendation, then as always, was that no operation should be taken in the Mediterranean except as a directly supporting move for the Channel attack and our planned deployment [of troops out of Italy] should proceed with all possible speed." Eisenhower, "Crusade in Europe," p.198-200

That was after FDR told him what to say.
But, his view before that.......

a. But, in 1943, before he was offered another star:
"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO.In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

" In December 1943, it was announced that Eisenhower would be Supreme Allied Commander in Europe."Military career of Dwight D. Eisenhower - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



2. "The actual plans for the invasion of Europe "was the brain child of the United States army," meaning General Eisenhower, a Marshall protégé, who was in charge of the planning (according to Stimson's book, "On Active Service in Peace and War").

The evidence is conclusive, however, that if Eisenhower's ideas had not been in full accord with those conceived before the war by Marshall and Hopkins, the planning assignment, the supreme command of the allied expeditionary forces, and the five stars that adorned his shoulders would have gone to some other general.
"The Twenty Year Revolution," p.119, Manly



So....Eisenhower was for it (attack via Italy) before he was against it (suddenly for attack via France,)




How's that? In your face!

You have no idea what any of this means. Italy was always the secondary diversionary front, invading France was always going to be the main effort. No one thought Germany was going to be conquered via Italy. No one.

Post # 133 destroyed you.

Now, step off.

 

[Camp]

And here we have the USMB version of "common core" ie revisionist history, ladies and gents. The leftists have their own version of everything that's been done to keep them from power, and repair what they did while in power. They tend to like liars with a nice smile, politicians instead of statesmen. They revel in the fact their heroes make a career of politics instead of in the marketplace of competition. Nepotism, waiting one's turn for higher office, backroom deals enforced by neighborhood thugs....that's the Rat party. Leftists can't compete so they strive to be the referees of the game. What you see above is the art of lying to the face of truth....they'll shape any event or leader to fit their narrow definition of history....and they never rest, which is why we can never rest and must strive to correct and defeat them.

And with all that said, this thread gets loaded down with misinformation from posters like you who talk trash but never provide viable links to your imaginary "facts", and smeared with trashy graffiti already rejected and mocked when she used it in her own created threads.

 

[Discombobulated]

Really? Then explain how Stalin had any authority over FDR.

They were soul-mates.

1. He gave official recognition to Stalin in 1933

As leader of the Soviet Union? He was. Why not recognize that FACT?

Which countries did NOT recognize Stalin as the leader of the USSR?

2. He provided lend lease largesse to Stalin far and above what was necessary

Who says? ( and whomever you name, that would be their OPINION.)

3. He allowed and encouraged Stalin's spies in his administration.

If that's a factual statement, then back it up with news accounts from the era. Or anything that isn't an OPINION.

4. He insisted on a communist as his second vice president

OK, prove that.

5. He sent uranium and plans for the atomic bomb to Stalin

Prove that with a fact-based link to uncovered or declassified documents from the U.S. government. Because that's the only way that could be proven.

6. All of this with the foreknowledge that Stalin was a homicidal psychopath.

What does that say about Fred Koch?

7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.

Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't.

What is your explanation for the above?

And...if your did your own research, and verified same....would you have had the courage to ask your history teachers/professors to explain their support of FDR in the face of these facts?

Would you?

They are not FACTS! For fuck's sake!


Now, after all that tap-dancing, answer the question you are avoiding:

How did Stalin have any authority over FDR?

I predict that you will punt again.

"7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.
Again - prove that with verifiable facts. You won't. You can't."



Of course I can.

Everything I post is factual and correct.


Stalin insisted that D-Day be via western France....he wanted, and got, all of Eastern Europe under his control. So...he dissuaded FDR from an attack via Italy.

1. As to the question of Eisenhower's preference in attacking Fortress Europa, he stated in 1948: "My own recommendation, then as always, was that no operation should be taken in the Mediterranean except as a directly supporting move for the Channel attack and our planned deployment [of troops out of Italy] should proceed with all possible speed." Eisenhower, "Crusade in Europe," p.198-200

That was after FDR told him what to say.
But, his view before that.......

a. But, in 1943, before he was offered another star:
"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO.In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

" In December 1943, it was announced that Eisenhower would be Supreme Allied Commander in Europe."Military career of Dwight D. Eisenhower - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



2. "The actual plans for the invasion of Europe "was the brain child of the United States army," meaning General Eisenhower, a Marshall protégé, who was in charge of the planning (according to Stimson's book, "On Active Service in Peace and War").

The evidence is conclusive, however, that if Eisenhower's ideas had not been in full accord with those conceived before the war by Marshall and Hopkins, the planning assignment, the supreme command of the allied expeditionary forces, and the five stars that adorned his shoulders would have gone to some other general.
"The Twenty Year Revolution," p.119, Manly



So....Eisenhower was for it (attack via Italy) before he was against it (suddenly for attack via France,)




How's that? In your face!

You have no idea what any of this means. Italy was always the secondary diversionary front, invading France was always going to be the main effort. No one thought Germany was going to be conquered via Italy. No one.

Post # 133 destroyed you.

Now, step off.

Post #133 is a lot like post #204.......more of the same mindless nonsense. You are clearly out of your depth.

 

[sameech]

If there are any members here who lived during that time, it would be interesting to hear how any of these programs helped or hurt someone they knew. I recall relatives from rural areas telling me that it helped them on a day to day because they were rebuilding old wood bridges and the like. Apparently you could rent them out for cheap to help you with projects on your farm and the like (unless I am confusing the CCC with the German POW's).

 

[Discombobulated]

Where it not for ignorance, you'd be agreeing with me.

Really? Then explain how Stalin had any authority over FDR.

They were soul-mates.

1. He gave official recognition to Stalin in 1933
2. He provided lend lease largesse to Stalin far and above what was necessary
3. He allowed and encouraged Stalin's spies in his administration.
4. He insisted on a communist as his second vice president
5. He sent uranium and plans for the atomic bomb to Stalin
6. All of this with the foreknowledge that Stalin was a homicidal psychopath.
7. He acquiesced to d-day, not where his generals suggested, but where Stalin insisted.



What is your explanation for the above?

And...if your did your own research, and verified same....would you have had the courage to ask your history teachers/professors to explain their support of FDR in the face of these facts?

Would you?

Numbers two through seven are absolute bull shit, completely unsupported by any legitimate historians.

Wait...."completely unsupported by any legitimate historians"....you're pretending you have knowledge of history, much less "legitimate historians"?????


Your ignorance is hidden about as well as a bikini hides 45 pounds of ugly fat~


Now jot this down: never......never.....doubt what I post.
It is completely accurate, your biases notwithstanding.

Your outstanding characteristics, lying imbecile, are so obvious, that this post should come under the heading of 'beating a dead horse.'....

But I can't resist....my guilty pleasure.

Let's take the item that you claim....I eschew vulgar language, so I can't quote you, but with which you disagree vehemently....the one that should have ended any association Roosevelt considered with Stalin:

"6. All of this with the foreknowledge that Stalin was a homicidal psychopath."




Now...watch me make mincemeat out of you:

1. FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. On November 16, 1933, President Roosevelt rushed to embrace, endorse Stalin....and recognize the USSR.

If this act, based on FDR's additional pro-Soviet endeavors, was rational....then these folks must have been irrational:
"Four Presidents and their six Secretaries of State for over a decade and a half held to this resolve," i.e., refusal to recognize the Soviet government. That was written by Herbert Hoover, one of those four Presidents. He wrote it in his "Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover's Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath"by George H. Nash, published posthumously, obviously, in 2011, pg 24-29.


2. Bear in mind, eight months earlier, journalist Gareth Jones had exposed Stalin's Terror Famine:
"In the train a Communist denied to me that there was a famine. I flung a crust of bread which I had been eating from my own supply into a spittoon. A peasant fellow-passenger fished it out and ravenously ate it." Gareth Jones journalist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

a. Malcolm Muggeridge "was the first writer to reveal the true nature of Stalin s regime when in 1933 he exposed the terror famine in the Ukraine. " Time and Eternity The Uncollected Writings of Malcolm Muggeridge Malcolm Muggeridge Nicholas Flynn 9781570759055 Amazon.com Books

b. So FDR knew of the Terror Famine...yet he enveloped Joe Stalin in " the cloak of his popularity..."
Time Magazine, December 17, 1934.


3. Check the timeline. FDR didn't embrace the USSR out of a need in a fight against Hitler....in fact, at that time, FDR had a rosy relationship with Germany. So....why overlook the genocide?

a. May 11, 1933, the Nazi newspaper Volkischer Beobachter, (People’s Observer): January 17, 1934, “We, too, as German National Socialists are looking toward America…” and “Roosevelt’s adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies” comparable to Hitler’s own dictatorial ‘Fuhrerprinzip.’



Did I just eat your lunch, or what????




Never doubt me again.


Never.

In other words: The US government recognized the Soviet government, opening diplomatic and trade relations between the two. My answer to that is: So what?