Eviscerating 'The Roosevelt Alibi'

[JakeStarkey]

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

 

[Correll]

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

 

[rightwinger]

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

 

[regent]

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

I think in these games if one draws the WISH CARD that says GOOD FOR FIVE NUKES your opponent can't do much about it.

 

[Correll]

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

 

[rightwinger]

We

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

What concessions did you want from stalin

 

[Correll]

We

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

What concessions did you want from stalin

We've gone over that before.

 

[rightwinger]

We

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

What concessions did you want from stalin

We've gone over that before.

And you have yet to explain how FDR would dislodge soviet troops from occupied territory

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Correll, if you could kill Hitler, then you could probably negotiate such a surrender. The problem was this: nobody killed AH.

Plenty of people tried.

If the Allied didn't have such a hard line against ANY conditions or negotiations it would have been a tremendous encouragement to more attempts.

What a bunch of fucking bullshit.

You know nothing of how Hitler was protected.

You are truly a stupid, insane asshole.

Reagan and Gerald Ford each had the secret service protection and they had 3 attempts on them.

If FDR wasn't Stalin's sock puppet and offered a separate peace with Germany Hitler was a dead man

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

What concessions did you want from stalin

We've gone over that before.

And you have yet to explain how FDR would dislodge soviet troops from occupied territory

I already told you, we had several ways. First use nuke on the Russians instead of Nagasaki. Second, team up and rearm and equip the Germans. Hitler-less Germany would have been vastly better Ally than the USSR

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Allies were not giving the German resistance the assurances against war crime prosecution, etc., that the General wanted.

Correll wants to play the "if" game although the troll has no evidence to work with.

Picaro finally has withdrqawn in self-shame from the thread.

And, Frank, what nuke for the 3rd Shock Army? When? May? There were no bombs. July? One bomb was tested to make sure it worked. August? The two bombs we had were used.

We had no more bombs until December.

You and Correll and Picaro play "if" this and "If" that with no facts. Please stop because you look very immature.

We could have saved the second bomb to use on your Soviet friends. Japan was already defeated.

 

[rightwinger]

Correll, if you could kill Hitler, then you could probably negotiate such a surrender. The problem was this: nobody killed AH.

Plenty of people tried.

If the Allied didn't have such a hard line against ANY conditions or negotiations it would have been a tremendous encouragement to more attempts.

What a bunch of fucking bullshit.

You know nothing of how Hitler was protected.

You are truly a stupid, insane asshole.

Reagan and Gerald Ford each had the secret service protection and they had 3 attempts on them.

If FDR wasn't Stalin's sock puppet and offered a separate peace with Germany Hitler was a dead man

What peace did you want?

Did hitler get to keep his concentration camps

 

[Correll]

We

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

What concessions did you want from stalin

We've gone over that be

We

IF you want to say that FDR did such a great job, as you libs want to, you have to compare to reasonable alternative policies that he might have done.

For example I have stated the FDR was right to approve the Manhattan Project.

Why? Because nuking Japan was far better than the possible alternative.

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

What concessions did you want from stalin

We've gone over that before.

And you have yet to explain how FDR would dislodge soviet troops from occupied territory

.

You have repeatedly pretended that FDR's only options were all either/or situations.

Give aid, or have Hitler win.

Give aid or have Stalin not fight Hitler.

Give Stalin a free hand in Easter and Central Europe or war.



I have repeatedly discussed other options the FDR had.

And I do not have the support of the US military and diplomatic establishments to give me advice and options.

FDR was President at a time of great events.

He was given a very strong hand to deal with them, due to the inherent strength of the American nation and a fantastic geographical position.

He managed to do an OK job accomplishing him immediate short term goals.

He gave no thought to the long term, beyond getting Stalin to promise to hold free elections.

I hope he knew that Stalin was lying.


He does not deserve the high regard you libs hold him in

 

[Dot Com]

link?

 

[rightwinger]

We

Your problem is that you and PC have yet to come up with a reasonable alternative

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

What concessions did you want from stalin

We've gone over that before.

And you have yet to explain how FDR would dislodge soviet troops from occupied territory

I already told you, we had several ways. First use nuke on the Russians instead of Nagasaki. Second, team up and rearm and equip the Germans. Hitler-less Germany would have been vastly better Ally than the USSR

At a cost of a million soviets and a hundred thousand Americans

In the end, the Soviet Union folded without a shot

 

[Correll]

Correll, if you could kill Hitler, then you could probably negotiate such a surrender. The problem was this: nobody killed AH.

Plenty of people tried.

If the Allied didn't have such a hard line against ANY conditions or negotiations it would have been a tremendous encouragement to more attempts.

What a bunch of fucking bullshit.

You know nothing of how Hitler was protected.

You are truly a stupid, insane asshole.

Reagan and Gerald Ford each had the secret service protection and they had 3 attempts on them.

If FDR wasn't Stalin's sock puppet and offered a separate peace with Germany Hitler was a dead man

What peace did you want?

Did hitler get to keep his concentration camps

That is not a reasonable question.

Don't be Stat.

YOu have disagreed and made your points without being an asshole. DOn't start now.

 

[rightwinger]

Correll, if you could kill Hitler, then you could probably negotiate such a surrender. The problem was this: nobody killed AH.

Plenty of people tried.

If the Allied didn't have such a hard line against ANY conditions or negotiations it would have been a tremendous encouragement to more attempts.

What a bunch of fucking bullshit.

You know nothing of how Hitler was protected.

You are truly a stupid, insane asshole.

Reagan and Gerald Ford each had the secret service protection and they had 3 attempts on them.

If FDR wasn't Stalin's sock puppet and offered a separate peace with Germany Hitler was a dead man

What peace did you want?

Did hitler get to keep his concentration camps

That is not a reasonable question.

Don't be Stat.

YOu have disagreed and made your points without being an asshole. DOn't start now.

That is the million dollar question

The Germans were dirty and they knew it. Any conditional surrender would include them covering up the camps

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Correll, if you could kill Hitler, then you could probably negotiate such a surrender. The problem was this: nobody killed AH.

Plenty of people tried.

If the Allied didn't have such a hard line against ANY conditions or negotiations it would have been a tremendous encouragement to more attempts.

What a bunch of fucking bullshit.

You know nothing of how Hitler was protected.

You are truly a stupid, insane asshole.

Reagan and Gerald Ford each had the secret service protection and they had 3 attempts on them.

If FDR wasn't Stalin's sock puppet and offered a separate peace with Germany Hitler was a dead man

What peace did you want?

Did hitler get to keep his concentration camps

Uncle Joe took over operating the camps.

Peace where Stalin withdraws east of Poland

 

[Correll]

Plenty of people tried.

If the Allied didn't have such a hard line against ANY conditions or negotiations it would have been a tremendous encouragement to more attempts.

What a bunch of fucking bullshit.

You know nothing of how Hitler was protected.

You are truly a stupid, insane asshole.

Reagan and Gerald Ford each had the secret service protection and they had 3 attempts on them.

If FDR wasn't Stalin's sock puppet and offered a separate peace with Germany Hitler was a dead man

What peace did you want?

Did hitler get to keep his concentration camps

That is not a reasonable question.

Don't be Stat.

YOu have disagreed and made your points without being an asshole. DOn't start now.

That is the million dollar question

The Germans were dirty and they knew it. Any conditional surrender would include them covering up the camps

NOt all the germans were dirty.

YOu are aware that few of the Wehrmacht High Command were tried for War Crimes, right?

I have asked this before, before, btw.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We

Using the leverage that the terrible situation that Soviets were in gave FDR, to ask for concessions is hardly unreasonable.

Working with anti-nazi Germans is hardly unreasonable.

Giving some thought to the Post War Balance of Power is hardly unreasonable.

You need to pretend that such alternatives are unreasonable, for you are defending a liberal hero you are invested in.

What concessions did you want from stalin

We've gone over that before.

And you have yet to explain how FDR would dislodge soviet troops from occupied territory

I already told you, we had several ways. First use nuke on the Russians instead of Nagasaki. Second, team up and rearm and equip the Germans. Hitler-less Germany would have been vastly better Ally than the USSR

At a cost of a million soviets and a hundred thousand Americans

In the end, the Soviet Union folded without a shot

You mean thanks to Reagan's principled and firm stand, right