Eviscerating 'The Roosevelt Alibi'

[PoliticalChic]

7. "Europe suffers, with respect to its American cousin, from the debtor’s complex. It is clearly understood, at least in Western Europe, that without American help in 1917, and especially in 1944, it would have been purely and simply wiped off the map or permanently colonized by Soviet troops."
Pascal Bruckner in his bookThe Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism.



Did you get that?


"...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."


Sound like Russia was about to surrender to Hitler, or be defeated by same?



And "...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."
was exactly the plan that Stalin's ally, Roosevelt, had in mind:

Evidence can be seen in a document which Roosevelt's live-in Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":

"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."


Again: "...no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."
More proof that no one believed that Stalin would be defeated by Hitler: so much for 'Roosevelt's Alibi.'


Actually....what that means is that, with Germany crushed, communism could not be resisted.

And yet only eastern Europe, mostly the countries that sided with the NAZI's were colonized temporarily by the communist at great expense and sacrifice by the USSR. The stronger nations of western Europe stayed democratic and prospered as they became economic and military allies with America. The end result has been that even today, Russia is fighting at keeping little scraps of Europe like a few areas if Ujraube under it's influence, while even the eastern Euro countries have kicked them to the curb.

Well, hot-air-boy.....look what I've reduced you to.


Obviously my thesis is undeniable: there was no danger of Stalin surrendering to Hitler.



You've served your purpose....

...you're dismissed.

No one seriously thought Stalin would surrender. The thought was that he would be pushed far to the west into a purely defensive mode and not be able to have an impact with an offensive campaign on Germany's increasing military might and alliances with the eastern European forces that were joining to make an unstoppable axis of military power. The rush to support the Soviet forces was to hinder those alliances from growing in strength and bog down German forces in the east. It gave the British time to defend herself and prepare, along with the allies, to conquer Germany from the west. The Soviet forces in the east and the allied forces in the west gave mutual assistance to each other by dividing Germany's forces. The Soviets did not have the means needed to build an offensive army to take on the Germans. Without lend lease and all that aid from the US they would have been stuck fighting one Stalingrad after another with their main strengths being January and February and the western forest.

I told you that you were dismissed.

Now you've simply dug a deeper hole for yourself.

Regularly, you Roosevelt apologists have claimed that Roosevelt had to give unlimited supplies, Lend Lease, etc., materials that should have gone to our own troops, to Stalin so that he would continue to battle Hitler.

Of course, it was a bogus alibi.....

...and your retreat was superfluous.


The last thing I ever need is your support for my thesis.
Be gone.

 

[rightwinger]

Actually, here is the reality:
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

OK...lets go there

FDR stays out and Stalin defeats Hitler

1. What happens to German occupied France, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Greece and Italy?
2. Instead of an Iron curtain in Europe, we would have had a Communist Europe
3. In the end, Communism fell ....FDR ultimately won

How many FDR hating threads would PC give us then?

 

[Camp]

The pattern is one you should be used to. Your crap thesis gets mocked and debunked as political hackery posing as history. Your nonsense gets taken apart piece by piece. Notice you are not challenging your exposed fraudulence but rather reverting to that name calling and disparaging nonsense as deflections. In your last post you claimed Stalin got unlimited supplies. He didn't. He was denied many things. Important things like the best weapons on the battlefield made by and in America.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The pattern is one you should be used to. Your crap thesis gets mocked and debunked as political hackery posing as history. Your nonsense gets taken apart piece by piece. Notice you are not challenging your exposed fraudulence but rather reverting to that name calling and disparaging nonsense as deflections. In your last post you claimed Stalin got unlimited supplies. He didn't. He was denied many things. Important things like the best weapons on the battlefield made by and in America.

You moron.....the other imbecile....post #22 is exactly who I quoted as claiming the Roosevelt Alibi!

You and your honey should get your stories straight.

 

[Camp]

The pattern is one you should be used to. Your crap thesis gets mocked and debunked as political hackery posing as history. Your nonsense gets taken apart piece by piece. Notice you are not challenging your exposed fraudulence but rather reverting to that name calling and disparaging nonsense as deflections. In your last post you claimed Stalin got unlimited supplies. He didn't. He was denied many things. Important things like the best weapons on the battlefield made by and in America.

You moron.....the other imbecile....post #22 is exactly who I quoted as claiming the Roosevelt Alibi!

You and your honey should get your stories straight.

Now you are going into straight out idiot mode. How did you quote post #22 BEFORE IT WAS POSTED???
Your threads always lead away from answering challenges to your conspiracy theories and becoming about you and your personal attacks on those who disagree with you or challenge your concepts. That is because you have weak concepts that only delusional nut jobs believe in.

 

[rightwinger]

Not only did FDR stop the Depression and give us Social Security...

He saved the free world....why aren't you thanking him PC?

 

[Statistikhengst]

Once again, reported: please put this in the Conspiracy Forum.

Conspiracy? What conspiracy?

FDR's close alliance with Stalin is a matte of historical record.

And I have never heard of a good explanation of why he had so little concern for the strong position he was putting the SU in, in the post war world.

PC analysis is very speculative, but hardly the stuff of conspiracy theory.

The argument that the SU could have defeated Nazi Germany by itself is certainly one I have heard made many times before.

It is also false.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[Statistikhengst]

7. "Europe suffers, with respect to its American cousin, from the debtor’s complex. It is clearly understood, at least in Western Europe, that without American help in 1917, and especially in 1944, it would have been purely and simply wiped off the map or permanently colonized by Soviet troops."
Pascal Bruckner in his bookThe Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism.



Did you get that?


"...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."


Sound like Russia was about to surrender to Hitler, or be defeated by same?



And "...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."
was exactly the plan that Stalin's ally, Roosevelt, had in mind:

Evidence can be seen in a document which Roosevelt's live-in Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":

"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."


Again: "...no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."
More proof that no one believed that Stalin would be defeated by Hitler: so much for 'Roosevelt's Alibi.'


Actually....what that means is that, with Germany crushed, communism could not be resisted.

Are you really that stupid? With our help, SU was able to regain it's footing in the war. Had the USA not entered the war in December 1941, Britain would have surely fallen and then Hitler would have only had a 1-front war to fight instead of 2. Even with our entrance into the war, the Axis had dominance well into 1943. Without our entrance into the war, Stalingrad would likely have not been recaptured in 1943, the Germans would have captured all of the ploesti oilfields and way beyond and that would have been that. Defeat for Russia.

You live in a complete fantasy world, full of colorful unicorns.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[PoliticalChic]

Not only did FDR stop the Depression and give us Social Security...

He saved the free world....why aren't you thanking him PC?

1. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
article - AEI

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

 

[PoliticalChic]

The pattern is one you should be used to. Your crap thesis gets mocked and debunked as political hackery posing as history. Your nonsense gets taken apart piece by piece. Notice you are not challenging your exposed fraudulence but rather reverting to that name calling and disparaging nonsense as deflections. In your last post you claimed Stalin got unlimited supplies. He didn't. He was denied many things. Important things like the best weapons on the battlefield made by and in America.

You moron.....the other imbecile....post #22 is exactly who I quoted as claiming the Roosevelt Alibi!

You and your honey should get your stories straight.

Now you are going into straight out idiot mode. How did you quote post #22 BEFORE IT WAS POSTED???
Your threads always lead away from answering challenges to your conspiracy theories and becoming about you and your personal attacks on those who disagree with you or challenge your concepts. That is because you have weak concepts that only delusional nut jobs believe in.

The pattern is one you should be used to. Your crap thesis gets mocked and debunked as political hackery posing as history. Your nonsense gets taken apart piece by piece. Notice you are not challenging your exposed fraudulence but rather reverting to that name calling and disparaging nonsense as deflections. In your last post you claimed Stalin got unlimited supplies. He didn't. He was denied many things. Important things like the best weapons on the battlefield made by and in America.

"In your last post you claimed Stalin got unlimited supplies. He didn't. He was denied many things. Important things like the best weapons on the battlefield made by and in America."

You lie.




1. It is well known and documented that FDR's administration was riddled with Stalin's agents, and, in many ways, policy was directed from Moscow. Case in point, aid to Mao and resistance to helping Chiang Kaichek. Less well known, when told about the spies, Roosevelt simply laughed.

2. Further, supplies didn't just "flow" to the Soviet Union, they flooded it, including non-military supplies: a tire plant, an oil refinery, pipe-fabricating works, over a million miles of copper wire, switchboard-panels, lathes and power tools, textile machinery, woodworking, typesetting, cranes hoists, derricks, air compressors, $152 million in women's 'dress goods,' 18.4 million pounds of writing paper, cigarette cases, jeweled watches, lipstick, liquor, bathtubs, and pianos.

a. " The temporary congruence of interests was called an alliance, albeit a strange one. For example, when the Americans tried to find a way that long-range American bombers could land in Russia to re-fuel, so as to bomb deep into Germany, the Russians were found to be suspicious, ungrateful, secretive, xenophobic, unfriendly, in short….a great deal of take and very little give."
“The Anti-Communist Manifestos,” by John V. Fleming, chapter six.


3. George Kennan wrote: "there is no adequate justification for continuing a program of lavish and almost indiscriminate aid to the Soviet Union at a time when there was increasing reason to doubt whether her purposes in Eastern Europe, aside from the defeat of Germany, would be ones which we Americans could approve and sponsor."
George C. Herring, "Aid to Russia," p. xvii.


4. I challenge FDR apologists to explain government largesse to Soviet Russia, even superseding Allied, or even American military needs. Or American civilian needs: 217,660,666 pounds of butter shipped to the USSR during a time of strict state-side rationing.
John R. Deane, "The Strange Alliance: The Story of Our Efforts at Wartime Cooperation With Russia," p.94-95.


a. "The President has directed that 'airplanes be delivered in accordance with protocol schedules by the most expeditious means.' To implement these directives, the modification, equipment and movement of Russian planes have been given first priority, even over planes for US Army Air Forces."
From the diaries of Maj. George Racey Jordan, supervisory 'expediter' of Soviet Lend-Lease aid, p. 20.


b. At Congressional Hearing Regarding Shipments of Atomic Material to the Soviet Union During WWII, Washington GPO, 1950, p.909-910, Major Jordan would tell Congress that he kept this presidential directive on his person to show incredulous officers.

 

[rightwinger]

Not only did FDR stop the Depression and give us Social Security...

He saved the free world....why aren't you thanking him PC?

1. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
article - AEI

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

The problem with the Brookings study is that it ignores something that FDR understood. The Depression was not about economic numbers....it was about people suffering

FDR programs brought relief to those who needed it



.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. "Europe suffers, with respect to its American cousin, from the debtor’s complex. It is clearly understood, at least in Western Europe, that without American help in 1917, and especially in 1944, it would have been purely and simply wiped off the map or permanently colonized by Soviet troops."
Pascal Bruckner in his bookThe Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism.



Did you get that?


"...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."


Sound like Russia was about to surrender to Hitler, or be defeated by same?



And "...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."
was exactly the plan that Stalin's ally, Roosevelt, had in mind:

Evidence can be seen in a document which Roosevelt's live-in Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":

"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."


Again: "...no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."
More proof that no one believed that Stalin would be defeated by Hitler: so much for 'Roosevelt's Alibi.'


Actually....what that means is that, with Germany crushed, communism could not be resisted.

Are you really that stupid? With our help, SU was able to regain it's footing in the war. Had the USA not entered the war in December 1941, Britain would have surely fallen and then Hitler would have only had a 1-front war to fight instead of 2. Even with our entrance into the war, the Axis had dominance well into 1943. Without our entrance into the war, Stalingrad would likely have not been recaptured in 1943, the Germans would have captured all of the ploesti oilfields and way beyond and that would have been that. Defeat for Russia.

You live in a complete fantasy world, full of colorful unicorns.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Too bad you can't read.

The thread disproved everything you posted, you fool.


And this...

3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'

Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"

 

[PoliticalChic]

Not only did FDR stop the Depression and give us Social Security...

He saved the free world....why aren't you thanking him PC?

1. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
article - AEI

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

The problem with the Brookings study is that it ignores something that FDR understood. The Depression was not about economic numbers....it was about people suffering

FDR programs brought relief to those who needed it

That's why he extended the Depression????

1. Here is an interesting visual: imagine a triple line of the unemployed, three across, consisting of those unemployed under Hoover, in 1931. The line would have gonefrom Los Angeles, across the country, to the border of Maine.

What effect did Roosevelt have on the line?

Well, eight years later, in 1939, the length of the line would have gone further, from the Maine border, south to Boston, then on to New York City, then to Philadelphia, on to Washington, D.C.- and finally, into Virginia.
Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal"



So....you know more than Henry Morgenthau?

2. Franklin Roosevelt's Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau confessed that the "New Deal" was a failure in sworn testimony before Congress on May 9, 1939.

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work."

And FDR's Treasury Secretary also told Congress:

"I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. ... And an enormous debt to boot!"
(See: Human EventsGet Over It New Deal Didn t Do the Job Human Events and The Heritage Foundation We re Spending More Than Ever and It Doesn t Work .)




I don't mind education you....too bad you aren't capable of learning.

 

[rightwinger]

7. "Europe suffers, with respect to its American cousin, from the debtor’s complex. It is clearly understood, at least in Western Europe, that without American help in 1917, and especially in 1944, it would have been purely and simply wiped off the map or permanently colonized by Soviet troops."
Pascal Bruckner in his bookThe Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism.



Did you get that?


"...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."


Sound like Russia was about to surrender to Hitler, or be defeated by same?



And "...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."
was exactly the plan that Stalin's ally, Roosevelt, had in mind:

Evidence can be seen in a document which Roosevelt's live-in Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":

"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."


Again: "...no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."
More proof that no one believed that Stalin would be defeated by Hitler: so much for 'Roosevelt's Alibi.'


Actually....what that means is that, with Germany crushed, communism could not be resisted.

Are you really that stupid? With our help, SU was able to regain it's footing in the war. Had the USA not entered the war in December 1941, Britain would have surely fallen and then Hitler would have only had a 1-front war to fight instead of 2. Even with our entrance into the war, the Axis had dominance well into 1943. Without our entrance into the war, Stalingrad would likely have not been recaptured in 1943, the Germans would have captured all of the ploesti oilfields and way beyond and that would have been that. Defeat for Russia.

You live in a complete fantasy world, full of colorful unicorns.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Too bad you can't read.

The thread disproved everything you posted, you fool.


And this...

3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'

Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"

What a moron

Allow the Soviets and Nazis to fight to the death with all of Europe as the prize?

In practice....FDR allowed the Soviets and Nazis to exhaust themselves killing millions and beating themselves to a pulp. Then he invaded Normandy and seized Western Europe for the good guys

Genius, pure genius

 

[Penelope]

Once again, reported: please put this in the Conspiracy Forum.

It does not belong in the conspiracy forum. Too bad for everyone this offends, and it blows the Jew holocaust fable right where it belongs, in the garbage.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. "Europe suffers, with respect to its American cousin, from the debtor’s complex. It is clearly understood, at least in Western Europe, that without American help in 1917, and especially in 1944, it would have been purely and simply wiped off the map or permanently colonized by Soviet troops."
Pascal Bruckner in his bookThe Tyranny of Guilt: An Essay on Western Masochism.



Did you get that?


"...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."


Sound like Russia was about to surrender to Hitler, or be defeated by same?



And "...permanently colonized by Soviet troops..."
was exactly the plan that Stalin's ally, Roosevelt, had in mind:

Evidence can be seen in a document which Roosevelt's live-in Soviet spy, Harry Hopkins took with him to the Quebec conference in August, 1943, entitled "Russia's Position," quoted as follows in Robert Sherwood's book, "Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History,":

"Russia's post-war position in Europe will be a dominant one. With Germany crushed, there is no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."


Again: "...no power in Europe to oppose her tremendous military forces."
More proof that no one believed that Stalin would be defeated by Hitler: so much for 'Roosevelt's Alibi.'


Actually....what that means is that, with Germany crushed, communism could not be resisted.

Are you really that stupid? With our help, SU was able to regain it's footing in the war. Had the USA not entered the war in December 1941, Britain would have surely fallen and then Hitler would have only had a 1-front war to fight instead of 2. Even with our entrance into the war, the Axis had dominance well into 1943. Without our entrance into the war, Stalingrad would likely have not been recaptured in 1943, the Germans would have captured all of the ploesti oilfields and way beyond and that would have been that. Defeat for Russia.

You live in a complete fantasy world, full of colorful unicorns.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Too bad you can't read.

The thread disproved everything you posted, you fool.


And this...

3. Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:" 'There is no doubt whatsoever thatit would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'

Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"

What a moron

Allow the Soviets and Nazis to fight to the death with all of Europe as the prize?

In practice....FDR allowed the Soviets and Nazis to exhaust themselves killing millions and beating themselves to a pulp. Then he invaded Normandy and seized Western Europe for the good guys

Genius, pure genius

It's enlightening that you call Hanson Baldwin a moron.

Hanson Weightman Baldwin (March 22, 1903 - November 13, 1991) was the long-time military editor of the New York Times. He won a Pulitzer Prize "for his coverage of the early days of World War II". He authored or edited numerous books on military topics.[1]
Hanson W. Baldwin - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Your comment has the quality of a boomerang, doesn't it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You said the Russians were 5.5. times as lethal as the other allied forces combined. They were also slaughtered to the tune of up to 13,000,000 military deaths. Far, far more than any of the ally or axis powers.

Slaughtered by whom?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Once again, reported: please put this in the Conspiracy Forum.

^ Reflexive Defense of Uncle Joe

 

[PoliticalChic]

Once again, reported: please put this in the Conspiracy Forum.

It does not belong in the conspiracy forum. Too bad for everyone this offends, and it blows the Jew holocaust fable right where it belongs, in the garbage.

It does no such thing.

There is no mention, even peripherally, of the Holocaust.

While Stalin killed over 20 million of his own people....Hitler was not far behind.

Only a psychotic would doubt the Holocaust.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Bowing to popular requests.....here is another thread awarding Franklin Delano Roosevelt the contumely he so richly deserves! (Actually, the sort of fake requests by folks who really don't want the truth mentioned.)



1. For the Left, Franklin Roosevelt must be seen as the brilliant savior, not only of America, but of all of the Western world! And, toward that end, all of his endeavors in aiding and abetting Stalin have to be seen as saving the world from Nazism.....
(Notice how frequently the Left anoints 'saviors'?)



Get ready: here it comes...after all.....without Roosevelt's aid to Russia, Hitler would have defeated the USSR, and the rest of the world!!!
(Cue Toccata and Fugue in D minor)

That's the alibi that Roosevelt fans use to 'explain' Roosevelt's slavish, servile, obsequious conduct toward Joseph Stalin.


Is the alibi true?








Of course not.....nothing could be further from the truth.


Actually, here is the reality:
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.






2. Today, with the research unshrouded by wartime propaganda, who believes that Stalin would have surrendered to Hitler?
Only the usual suspects, the fools who still worship Franklin Roosevelt and need the mythology and hagiography to retain the Liberal worldview of history.


Two facts that make my argument:
a. Stalin could not care less how many Russian lives were lost.... and it was Stalin, rather than Hitler, who killed the most Russians.

b. The Russians were prepared for Hitler's attack; Hitler began Operation Barbarossa with only two months supplies...


And, get this: it is impossible to make an argument that Stalin was any better than Hitler. Stalin was smarter and more devious....and far more evil...than either Hitler or Roosevelt.




3. What the heck would lead anyone to believe that Stalin would surrender to Hitler???
The fabrication is central to any argument designed to shield Roosevelt, and explain his pandering to the homicidal maniac, Stalin.

Sans the view that everything Roosevelt did saved Russia from being steam-rollered by the Nazis, surrendering to Hitler, and giving Hitler a free hand in the west.....well.....the curtain is pulled aside, and everyone can see that the wizard of Hyde Park weren't no wizard at all!

He was to Stalin what pre-pubescent teeny-boppers are to Justin Bieber....love-sick.

You know nothing of our American history and you have no familiar connections to that period of time in America

Just another adopted little Asian girl spew

As predicted, Stalin defender can't answer the OP directly, so he attacks PC