Roosevelt....the Un-Reagan

[Wry Catcher]

Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.

Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.

The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.

FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.

What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?

And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.

Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.

And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR. We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.

And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?

Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.

Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.

Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.

The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.

FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.

ROTFLMAO

Had Germany and the USSR gone at it without Germany's being at war with us......neither would have been meaningful afterwards.

FDR only helped the USSR...unknowingly.....but stupidly.

And you know this because of your great study of history- which led you to believe FDR should have been using his non-existant Hydrogen bombs to bomb Moscow?

You are Monday Morning quarter backing 70 years after the fact- and from ignorance.

Once again- Hitler declared war on the United States- and ordered his u-boats to attack American shipping. We supported our British allies.

And yes- we supported the Soviets- because they were facing the bulk of the Nazi Army.

IF we did nothing one of the two parties would have ended up victorious- and if it had been the Soviets- they would have stretched from France to Manchuria.

That is beyond stupid.

Had HItler thrown his full force against he Soviets, he would have created a meat grinder that would have made the USSR meaningless.

The Battle of Stalingrad (July 17, 1942-Feb. 2, 1943), was the successful Soviet defense of the city of Stalingrad (now Volgograd) in the U.S.S.R. during World War II. Russians consider it to be the greatest battle of their Great Patriotic War, and most historians consider it to be the greatest battle of the entire conflict. It stopped the German advance into the Soviet Union and marked the turning of the tide of war in favor of the Allies. The Battle of Stalingrad was one of the bloodiest battles in history, with combined military and civilian casualties of nearly 2 million.
Battle of Stalingrad - World War II - HISTORY.com

 

[Sun Devil 92]

But not when dealing with Ann Coulter.

You are pathetic.

I actually find Ann Coulter amusing. She has figured out a persona to sell and the rightwing eats it up. But even though I disagree with what she says...she has a biting wit that is entertaining

Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes so much crap it is hard to find a point in all the mindless drooling

It's so simple to deflate the blimp you've become....
...time for more B-12 shots?

1. "I actually find Ann Coulter amusing."
You've never read any of the scholarly and well documented best sellers Queen Ann has written.

2. "Political Chic is just tedious. I would love to debate what she actually says but she cuts and pastes."
Cut and paste is the manner of presentation...not the factual material provided.
And...you don't have enough knowledge to debate me.

Not one single thing I've posted....and documented and sourced via 'cut and paste' has been shown to be less than accurate.

And it will continue so.

I'd rather engage in an intellectual discussion with Stephanie

She brings more to the table

You've not engaged in an intellectual discussion since you joined the board from what I've seen.

Save it

Butthurt much ?

You and your daisy chain couldn't take on PC if she was in a coma.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Stalin didn't spend 20 million to get his part of Eastern Europe. He was invaded.

Please don't be such a liar.

You'd figure that with so many losses, he be spent. Which he was.

FDR and Churchhill caved on the Eastern Europe.

I am sure the people of East Berlin felt that FDR got the better part of the deal.

Can you be any more stupid ?

Eastern Europe was not a bargaining chip. It was occupied by the Red Army
The part of the deal FDR got was West Berlin right in the middle of occupied East Germany

You are right.....Roosevelt didn't bargain or try to force him out.

No threats...no nothing.

Rolled over and caved.

Eastern Europe really flourished under Stalin.

Eastern Europe got screwed by Stalin.

Feel free to tell us what FDR could have actually done better.

The United States was involved in a two front war with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan- the Soviets had the most powerful army in the world at that time- and was driving the Germans back to Berlin. The United States desperately wanted the Soviets to come into the war against Japan- since at that time we were projecting 1,000,000 American casualties for the invasion of Japan. And remember- the American people thought of the USSR as our ally.

FDR got assurances of freedom for Eastern Europe that Stalin wiped his ass with.

What specific things do you think FDR should have- and could have- done differently?

And how many American lives would it have been acceptable to you to lose doing it.

Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.

And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR. We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.

And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?

Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.

Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.

Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.

The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.

FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.

" a German victory-"


This can only lead to one conclusion about you: "you are displaying sheer ignorance."

Here are the facts:

It was Stalin who was providing the resources that fueled the German armed forces.


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



By attacking in June, Hitler had planned to avoid Russia's three greatest generals....December, January, and February.

He didn't.

There was never a chance that Hitler would have beaten Stalin.

a.Stalin would not only not have surrendered, he would have defeated Hitler!

b.He used Roosevelt to make sure that there would be no German resistance to communism in Europe post war,

c. He forced Roosevelt to refuse to accept German surrender,or armistice, extending the war by several years, and costing hundreds of thousands of American lives.



You're simply a fool.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Tell me just why did we go to war with Germany.

And why those same principles would not apply to the USSR. We got a lot of men killed taking on the Krauts.

And how did we avoid a lot of loss of life in a fight with Japan......?

Don't think Stalin would have negotiated with the thread of an A-bomb over his head.

Of course, FDR would have had to be willing to obliterate Moscow.....no balls.

Once again- you are displaying sheer ignorance.

The United States went to war with Germany- because Germany declared war on the United States- a very stupid move on Germany's part- since if Hitler had not declared war, Roosevelt probably would have been forced to confront only Japan- leaving Hitler to the Soviets- which would have led to one of two conclusions- a German victory- or a Soviet victory that left the USSR with all of Western Europe.

FDR led the United States out of the Great Depression and led the United States to victory in WW2- of course you despise him.

ROTFLMAO

Had Germany and the USSR gone at it without Germany's being at war with us......neither would have been meaningful afterwards.

FDR only helped the USSR...unknowingly.....but stupidly.

And you know this because of your great study of history- which led you to believe FDR should have been using his non-existant Hydrogen bombs to bomb Moscow?

You are Monday Morning quarter backing 70 years after the fact- and from ignorance.

Once again- Hitler declared war on the United States- and ordered his u-boats to attack American shipping. We supported our British allies.

And yes- we supported the Soviets- because they were facing the bulk of the Nazi Army.

IF we did nothing one of the two parties would have ended up victorious- and if it had been the Soviets- they would have stretched from France to Manchuria.

That is beyond stupid.

Had HItler thrown his full force against he Soviets, he would have created a meat grinder that would have made the USSR meaningless.

The Battle of Stalingrad (July 17, 1942-Feb. 2, 1943), was the successful Soviet defense of the city of Stalingrad (now Volgograd) in the U.S.S.R. during World War II. Russians consider it to be the greatest battle of their Great Patriotic War, and most historians consider it to be the greatest battle of the entire conflict. It stopped the German advance into the Soviet Union and marked the turning of the tide of war in favor of the Allies. The Battle of Stalingrad was one of the bloodiest battles in history, with combined military and civilian casualties of nearly 2 million.
Battle of Stalingrad - World War II - HISTORY.com

Thanks for making my point. Had Hitler thrown his full force against the USSR he would have hurt them worse.

He was never going to take over the USSR...that was not possible.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So....what, exactly, did Stalin want from American foreign policy?

Who gives a damn what Stalin wanted?

Why exactly do prefer Hitler over FDR?

Why do you lie?

Oh...because you've been eviscerated in the discussion.

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.

All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.

Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.

Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?

Let's do

Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.

All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.

Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.

Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?

Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.

When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?

What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?

How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?

How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?

Make a much different test.

Best of luck.

FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk

Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain

 

[PoliticalChic]

Admit you gloss over the crap she posts too

If not, why don't you actually reply to what she posts?

So.....why are you unable to find a single mistake in my posts?

Wanna guess?

I gave up reading your posts years ago
Not worth the effort.....I'd rather read Stephanie

So you respond to post you don't read?

I speak to the topic of her threads
What she actually posts does little to support the topic

At least it's a little...you provide NOTHING to support your assertions.

It's, another of those perqs from being a Liberal:

1. You never have to apologize for your bad judgment.....e.g., the Obama presidency

2. You never have to account for the facts, those pesky things that prove how totally, abysmally, eternally wrong you are.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.

All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.

Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.

Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?

Let's do

Yes, I think we've pretty much established that Roosevelt was a gutless wonder.

All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.

Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.

Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?

Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.

When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?

What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?

How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?

How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?

Make a much different test.

Best of luck.

FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk

Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain

"Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."


Liar.


"Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany – FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!

What is most weird and most disturbing about Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."
West, "American Betrayal," p.266



Get that? Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!

 

[Searcher44]

Is this fair? The title and some of the contents of the OP invites comparison of the two Presidents in perhaps the most important role performed by any president, as defined by Article ll, Section ll of the U.S. Constitution "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States."
In FDRs case we are left with mountains of evidence, news reel footage, thousands of books etc. that help us assess the performance of his duties as C.I.C. on two fronts against mightily armed rivals intent on the destruction of America. These two rivals had basically taken advantage of America's flirtation with isolationism to amass the most formidable war machines the World had ever seen. FDR's root challenge was to take a peacetime nation and turn it into an weapons producing giant in a very short time. The fact that America came to be known as "The Arsenal of Democracy" is testament to the success of that undertaking. One example might be illustrative and enlightening. British and Allied shipping was being decimated by German U boats at the beginning of the War and trans-Atlantic supplies were the life blood of Britain's resistance to the Nazis, something had to be done. America had to build ships faster than the Germans could sink them. Roosevelt ordered an Emergency Shipping Program (which he monitored closely throughout the war), to counter the threat of the War effort being choked off. This is a long and complicated story and beautifully demonstrates Roosevelt's genius in picking the right people to accomplish near impossible tasks but I will keep it short. "Liberty Ships" were the workhorse of lend lease convoys. (Roosevelt called these ships "dreadful looking things", hence their nickname "Ugly Ducklings") At the beginning of 1942 these cargo ships were taking 240 days from keel lay down to launch. By the end of 1942 the time was cut to 56 days. By the end of the War one builder had completed a ship in less than 5 days. And I think I recall a source which said at the end of the War "Emergency" cargo ships were produced at the rate of one per day taking into account all the different yards that were in the effort, but I can't lay my hands on that piece of data, anybody? Roosevelt's plan had succeeded beyond anyone's wildest hope.
This demonstration of Roosevelt's capabilities as Commander-in-Chief was probably repeated at least thousand times during different aspects of WWll.

Can you see why I asked if it was fair of PoliticalChic to leave the door open for comparison between Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Ronald Wilson Reagan as War-time Commander-in-Chiefs? What conflict can we use to compare Reagan's Commander-in-Chief successes or failures? Unfortunately history leaves us only one - Operation Urgent Fury, the 1983 invasion of Grenada, a country whose population at that time might have filled a large football stadium. The operation was begun on Oct. 25 by about a 7600 mixed force assault. This being the first major operation since Vietnam all branches of the military wanted in on it and this led to one of the continuing problems of the action, communication between different parts of the force was difficult and without some luck could have been the cause of tragedy. One tragedy that was averted just in time was the shelling of "Ft. Adolphus" which was thought to be a Cuban stronghold. Luckily the shelling was called off, the fort turned out to be the Venezuelan Embassy. The General who ordered the shelling had not recognized the flag. This brings up another problem with the invasion, intelligence was poor and the troops had bad, or no maps at all. You'd think that wouldn't be a problem for a tourist destination like Grenada. The American forces faced stiffer defense than anticipated from the 1500 Grenada guard and 700 Cubans (the number of these Cubans who were combat personnel has been estimated at 100 to the full 700) On the evening of Oct. 26 two battalions of reinforcements had to be called in. Of course the assault was fairly quickly a success, after 3 days and with few American casualties. As I said though but for some luck things could have been worse. Poor intelligence had led to a group of helicopters being ordered into an area heavily defended by anti-aircraft. A Marine report commented on.... "a shortage of usable maps and "an almost total lack of information concerning suitable beaches and helicopter landing zones on Grenada." The Marines ended up relying in part on the memory of an officer who had vacationed on the island and who was in the assault force by chance. A troops mission to seize a prison was stymied by a NYT's reporter who had released the prisoners.

Margaret Thatcher, Reagan's great ally, had this to say at 12:30 A.M. on Oct.25;

"This action will be seen as intervention by a Western country in the internal affairs of a small independent nation, however unattractive its regime. I ask you to consider this in the context of our wider East/West relations and of the fact that we will be having in the next few days to present to our Parliament and people the siting of Cruise missiles in this country. I must ask you to think most carefully about these points. I cannot conceal that I am deeply disturbed by your latest communication. You asked for my advice. I have set it out and hope that even at this late stage you will take it into account before events are irrevocable"

The above mentioned Marine report, and an earlier analysis prepared for the joint Chiefs of Staff by Adm. Wesley L. McDonald, the invasion commander, support some of the charges made by military critics of the operation--that the landings were hastily planned, supported by inadequate intelligence, and complicated by glitches in coordinating units from the four military services."

And so this little war turned out to be a "success," but even without bringing up the questionable justifications put forward for "regime change" in this case I'm not sure Ronald Reagan as Commander-in-Chief would have worn this action as a badge of honor. Even though there were 5000 medals handed out for merit and valor in this little dust-up.

Sources - Wikipedia
Grenada Invasion Plagued by Mistakes, 2 Reports Say
US Invasion of Grenada: A 30-Year Retrospective
Invasion of Grenada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[regent]

I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and have never rated FDR below third best American president.
Perhaps PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.

 

[Unkotare]

I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and have never rated FDR below third best American president.
Perhaps PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.

Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.

 

[Camp]

All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.

Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.

Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?

Let's do

All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.

Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.

Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?

Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.

When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?

What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?

How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?

How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?

Make a much different test.

Best of luck.

FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk

Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain

"Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."


Liar.


"Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany – FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!

What is most weird and most disturbing about Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."
West, "American Betrayal," p.266



Get that? Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!

Explain why this claim about the USSR did not occupy those areas quoted by conspiracy theorist West is not a lie.

 

[rightwinger]

All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.

Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.

Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?

Let's do

All we have established is your complete ignorance of history.

Only is your sorry adolescent wet dreams.

Okay lets do a little test:
What was the date that FDR died?
What was the date of the first atomic bomb explosion?
How many hydrogen bombs did FDR have to drop on Moscow- as you suggested?

Add a few more questions and we'll have a good test.

When was FDR first made aware of the bomb ?

What time frame was FDR given for it's development ?

How close was FDR to having the bomb when he took off to give away Eastern Europe\ ?

How many people in Eastern Europe died because of Stalin ?

Make a much different test.

Best of luck.

FDR had no assurance the bomb would work. It was an advancement in science that was theoretical at the time. A working bomb might be one year away, it might be five. FDR did not know, but he thought it worth the risk

Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it
Stalin beat Hitler for FDR. The Allies ended up with Western Europe which was the best part of the bargain

"Eastern Europe was not FDRs to give.....Stalin had already taken it."


Liar.


"Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Bessarabia, the eastern half of Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Germany – FDR conceded all to Communist régimes or Soviet protection!

What is most weird and most disturbing about Roosevelt’s obdurate fatalism is that the entire Red Army at this time was still inside the USSR."
West, "American Betrayal," p.266



Get that? Roosevelt had planned to hand millions of human beings to communist oppression before the Soviets had even entered those nations!!

We were in no position to dislodge them

We got the West...they got the east

They paid much, much more for their piece and we got the better part

 

[Wry Catcher]

I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and have never rated FDR below third best American president.
Perhaps PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.

Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.

Which fallacy do you claim?

 

[regent]

And now for the education that government schooling skipped.

Franklin Roosevelt rejected the Constitution, accepted communism and revered the collective...the true American President, Ronald Reagan, venerated the Constitution, stood for the individual and despised Communism.


1. It was under Franklin Roosevelt that America underwent a sea change, ending the guidance of the Founders, the Constitution, and the emphasis on capitalism in favor of socialism.
It behooves those who wish to understand what happened to analyze what happened....and why.




What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?

It was through Franklin Roosevelt's tireless efforts that communism found a home in the United States. They don't teach that in government school.
Did FDR know he was providing a red carpet for communism, pun intended, or was he ignorant of the malevolence he was endorsing?



3.Just the other day, I watched journalists asking a Republican presidential contender specific and detailed questions about geo-politics...trying to see what he knew, and how good he would be at applying same to predicting future situations.
Apply same to FDR: was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism, and if so, shouldn't he have put off recognition of the Soviet empire until he perceived a change in those policies?


Let's see FDR's geopolitical education:
Here is his timeline of political education..

Nov 8, 1910 Franklin Roosevelt is elected to the New York State Senate.

In 1913, Franklin Roosevelt was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President Woodrow Wilson.

1920 Franklin Roosevelt ran as the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, alongside James M. Cox. The ticket is defeated by Republicans Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge.

Nov 6, 1928 Franklin Roosevelt is elected governor of New York.

Following the very last brokered election that produced a winning candidate, Nov 8, 1932 Franklin Roosevelt defeated Herbert Hoover to become the 32nd President of the United States, receiving 57.4% of the popular vote.

On November 16, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov.



So....here was a professional politician who spent a quarter century learning his craft, before he embraced the Soviet Union in what any astute observer of the world scene knew was a fraudulent agreement.

He had that quarter century to consider, refine, and make judgments about the world, about right and wrong, good and evil.....
It was his considered opinion that all previous Presidents and Secretaries of State were wrong in refusing to embrace the blood-drenched Bolsheviks.


What Did He Know, and When Did He Know It?

Was FDR the first to recognize the USSR or had other nations such as Britain, Italy, Germany and others recognized the USSR much earlier? Was America late in its recognition?

 

[Unkotare]

I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and have never rated FDR below third best American president.
Perhaps PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.

Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.

Which fallacy do you claim?

Appeal to authority, for one.

 

[regent]

This 2010 poll was taken by Siena college that polled 238 of America's best historians and presidential experts. The presidential polling has taken place since 1948 with over a thousand of America's most noted historians.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I have asked PC a few times to get her information to the historians that rate the presidents. Starting in 1948 the historians began rating the presidents, and have never rated FDR below third best American president.
Perhaps PC did get her priceless information to the historians because the historians changed their ratings of FDR from third best president, to America's greatest president.

Falling back yet again on logical fallacy, as expected.

Which fallacy do you claim?

Appeal to authority, for one.

That doesn't wash, the authority are a number of Ph.D historians, real authorities, unlike the iconoclasts PC offers for her evidence who are out to make a buck.

 

[Sallow]

Liberals formed this country. The conservatives were fighting against Liberals and along side the British.

Pick up a history book and stop sourcing Alex Jones wannbees.

Liberals fight for liberty and self determination? You're a blithering idiot

Say's the biggest blithering idiot on the board, Jroc.

By the way, Anne Coulter still holding out for you to come to Jesus.

He nailed you, didn't he.

Not getting nailed, lately PC? Lighten up on the bon bons. Put a little time in the gym. Maybe you can get hubby back from the massage parlors.

And so the only kind of post Leftists are capable of....

...after you've been revealed as an ignorant, dishonest, acolyte of the Left.


It's the Liberals version of licking your wounds.

Says the conservative that started with the personal insults.

Irony is a dish best served to PC. Who doesn't get it anyways.

There's wood..and it's less intelligent cousin, PoliticalChic.

 

[Sallow]

Yep- from the viewpoint of Conservatives like yourself- a 'diligent' media would have prevented FDR from leading the United States to victory over Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.

Would have prevented Americans from the horrors of Social Security.
Would have prevented Americans from the indignity of unemployment checks
Would have allowed bank runs to thrive as Americans lost faith in banks without depositers insurance.
Would have allowed the farmers to be run out of business

Oh how the Conservatives hate FDR for protecting Americans.

FDR led the United States to war. Harry Truman led the United States to the twisted semblance of victory. FDR promised to end the mild recession in 1932 and under his leadership the recession turned into a man killing bodies in the ditch soup line depression for his next two terms.. The federal government has been running farmers out of business since FDR created the alphabet federal schemes that were designed to make the DNC rich.The Media forced Nixon to resign but in retrospect a 2nd rate burglary doesn't come close to comparing the Constitutional insult of the the incarceration of American citizens without due process.

Oh what bitter Conservative revisionist history.

FDR prepared the United States for war, as the world went up in flames- with Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union were all trying to carve it up.

And when the United States was attacked by Imperial Japan- and when Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the United States- FDR led the United States to victory.

And you are still pissed off about that.

And FDR took the United States from the crushing 25% unemployment in the first year of his presidency to 9% in 1941.

And you are still pissed off about that.

You are still pissed off that FDR was for Americans

So hard to ascertain whether you are more the fool or more the liar.

"FDR prepared the United States for war,..."

Of course he did no such thing.

1. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.

You are an absolute liar and ignoramus. You have been shown in detail on numerous occasions and numerous threads how FDR pushed for and developed the weapons that would win WWII. Instead of producing weapons that would be obsolete he had the MIC concentrate and focus on developing new and modern aircraft and ships, including the carriers that would play the key role of beating Japan, and the aircraft that flew off of them. The bombers that destroyed Germany all lead to FDR's foresight and genius.
Your claim that FDR did very little for the Army in regards to weapons is an outrageous lie that ignores factual history.

And yet another lie.


Clean that boot-black off your tongue.

You carry water for this guy:



Nuff. Said.

You've been served.