Tender Mercies: A Love Story

[PoliticalChic]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'



2. A telling insight comes from close friend, and, equally a Sovietophile, William Christian Bullitt, Jr..
Also an extreme Liberal, a radical, Bullitt had worked for Woodrow Wilson, and, of course, was a fervent believer in internationalism. "Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Christian_Bullitt,_Jr.

Even so....he refused the advice of Bullitt.

a. Bullitt tried to stop FDR. In 1935, he had written to FDR about the Comintern Congress, and he followed that with a cable to Secretary of State Hull, that included that there had been "...no decrease in the determination of the Soviet Government to produce a world revolution...If this basic postulate of the Soviet Government is understood, there is nothing in nothing in Soviet domestic or foreign policy that is not clear.'

He went on to explain that Stalin yearned for a US-Japan war, 'after Japan had been thoroughly defeated....to acquire Manchuria and Sovietize China," Dunn, "Caught Between Roosevelt and Stalin," p. 52.


3. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, Ambassador William Bullitt warned Roosevelt about what would happen if he continued pursuing the policies of appeasement toward Stalin that formed the foundation of the American war strategy. He pleaded with FDR not to 'permit our war to prevent Nazi domination of Europe to be turned into a war to establish Soviet domination of Europe.' He predicted the Soviet annexation of half of Europe; George Kennan identified that letter as the earliest warning of what would be the result of FDR's policies.
"For the President Personal & Secret: Correspondence Between Franklin D. Roosevelt and William C. Bullitt," Orville H. Bullitt, p. 575-590


a. FDR replied: "Bill, I don't dispute your facts, they are accurate, I don't dispute the logic of your reasoning. I have just had a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. Harry [Hopkins] says he's not and that he doesn't want anything in the world but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."
William C. Bullitt, "How We Won The War and Lost The Peace," Life Magazine, August 30, 1948, p. 94

Get that? He ignored Bullitt....but acquiesced to Stalin's spy, Harry Hopkins.



How to explain this? Well, the CIA has an interesting take:

4. "In recent years, the statesmanship of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in particular his handling of Soviet affairs, has come under attack in historical studies. The situation has reached such a pass that even a psychiatrist who examined FDR’s medical records has opined that toward the end of World War II the US President ceded the better part of Eastern Europe to Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin because he was “gripped by clinical depression." How “Uncle Joe” Bugged FDR — Central Intelligence Agency


CIA re: FDR: 'he must have been NUTS!!!!!'


Note....nothing in this post is deniable.
More remedial education to follow.

 

[JoeB131]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

And here comes the CRAZY!!!!!

FDR was a communist. Or something.

Here's the reality of World War II.

The Russians did most of the fighting.

The notion that we could have somehow stopped Stalin from unleashing a caseload of whoop-ass on Hilter and his Eastern European Allies is absurd.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

And here comes the CRAZY!!!!!

FDR was a communist. Or something.

Here's the reality of World War II.

The Russians did most of the fighting.

The notion that we could have somehow stopped Stalin from unleashing a caseload of whoop-ass on Hilter and his Eastern European Allies is absurd.

Crazy....?

But there is no doubt that I can prove who is truly stupid and a lying sack of effluvia....that would be you.

1. Is there anything in the OP that you can show to be untrue?
No...there isn't.

2. Did I accurately quote Dennis Dunn....?
Yes, I did.

3. Did I accurately quote William Bullitt?
Absolutely.

4.Did I accurately quote the CIA report?
Indubitably.


So.....the OP was totally, thoroughly, and unconditionally correct.

And you're response was "And here comes the CRAZY!!!!!"
If only you had EVER studied history.


No wonder you are regularly exposed as lacking education and absolutely wrong in all of your attempts at posts.


Write soon, y'hear?

 

[Valerie]

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

me.. far be it from ME... you're welcome. ^

 

[PoliticalChic]

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

me.. far be it from ME... you're welcome. ^

I see you've had no trouble packing your entire education into this post.

 

[PoliticalChic]

5. Mitigating the conclusion that Roosevelt was mentally unbalanced, the CIA report goes on to suggest these as anodynes...


"Rather, the operant factors were:

the President’s supreme confidence in his own powers of persuasion,

his profound ignorance of the Bolshevik dictatorship,

his projection of humane motives onto his Soviet counterpart,

his determined resistance to contradictory evidence and advice,

and his wishful thinking based on geopolitical designs—mindsets supported and reinforced by his appointed advisors."
Ibid.



WHAT???/

He was just'stupid'???


Well....let's assume that one opts for 'he was stupid,' rather than 'he was mentally unbalanced.'




What does that say for those chanting his praises today?

Which of those analyses applies?




And...Isn't that what I've been saying about this nonpareil of the Left?

 

[aaronleland]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt

No... there hasn't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt

No... there hasn't.

How unusual....a Liberal wanting to silence an opposing voice.


Let me greet you in a more appropriate fashion: Sieg Heil...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Any who spend a moment mulling over their education will recognize that the Liberal 'education' system....at every level.....spends far more time persuading its captives that Joseph McCarthy was far more evil than Joseph Stalin....

...and they, largely, get away with it!



6. For some background about Soviet governance, and Joseph "Uncle Joe" Stalin...facts that the above suggests Roosevelt- and today's"educated"- were/are unaware of.



a. The whole world knew of Lenin's starving of millions of farmers to force collectivization.
Stalin, the same.

But, November 16, 1933, Roosevelt offered the recognition to the 'Evil Empire' that previous Presidents had withheld, even though 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


b. 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. " http://www.amazon.com/Time-Eternity-Uncollected-Writings-Muggeridge/dp/1570759057&tag=ff0d01-20


Think Roosevelt knew?
Think Roosevelt cared?

Why didn't he?
Because totalitarians believe along these lines:
"We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life." Leon Trotsky

 

[JoeB131]

Crazy....?

But there is no doubt that I can prove who is truly stupid and a lying sack of effluvia....that would be you.

1. Is there anything in the OP that you can show to be untrue?
No...there isn't.

2. Did I accurately quote Dennis Dunn....?
Yes, I did.

3. Did I accurately quote William Bullitt?
Absolutely.

4.Did I accurately quote the CIA report?
Indubitably.

again, the statements are laughable. It wasn't like FDR or anyone else was going to stop the Soviets from taking Eastern Europe. And since 5 out of the six countries they took were members of the Axis, no point feeling all that bad for them, either.

 

[JoeB131]

Any who spend a moment mulling over their education will recognize that the Liberal 'education' system....at every level.....spends far more time persuading its captives that Joseph McCarthy was far more evil than Joseph Stalin....

...and they, largely, get away with it!

6. For some background about Soviet governance, and Joseph "Uncle Joe" Stalin...facts that the above suggests Roosevelt- and today's"educated"- were/are unaware of.

Or we just put it in the proper context.

Here's the thing. You talk to Modern Russians, they STILL admire Stalin. Now why do you think that is? Can't blame the Communists, they're gone.

He made Russia a great power and defeated fascism.

Oh, yeah, Joe McCarthy was a drunken asshole whose OWN PARTY censured him.

 

[JoeB131]

"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

Okay, you see, I've seen homeless people in this country dumpster dive for some parts of a KFC meal I didn't finish. And this was during the Reagan years So what is your point here, exactly?

 

[Camp]

"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

Okay, you see, I've seen homeless people in this country dumpster dive for some parts of a KFC meal I didn't finish. And this was during the Reagan years So what is your point here, exactly?

A friend and I used to eat breakfast at the IHOP every morning before going to the job site. We began getting a takeout breakfast for the homeless old guy that was always near the site when we arrived. He refused to take the hand out and got belligerent and angry. We noticed he would take food from the trash cans so we began putting the IHOP breakfast directly into the trash barrel nearest our work site. It worked. The old guy got big hot breakfast of pancakes, bacon, sausage. biscuits and eggs everyday. Sometimes with extra sandwich for later. Couple times he looked up and smiled at us.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Crazy....?

But there is no doubt that I can prove who is truly stupid and a lying sack of effluvia....that would be you.

1. Is there anything in the OP that you can show to be untrue?
No...there isn't.

2. Did I accurately quote Dennis Dunn....?
Yes, I did.

3. Did I accurately quote William Bullitt?
Absolutely.

4.Did I accurately quote the CIA report?
Indubitably.

again, the statements are laughable. It wasn't like FDR or anyone else was going to stop the Soviets from taking Eastern Europe. And since 5 out of the six countries they took were members of the Axis, no point feeling all that bad for them, either.

"again, the statements are laughable."

No, liar....the statements are correct and accurate.

Every single one.

 

[Camp]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which 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."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

 

[Camp]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which 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."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

 

[bullwinkle]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which 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."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which 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."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

Camp, you and I are in complete agreement. When I read this original post, I couldn't help but remember the Steven Hawking quote, "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge."BTW, didn't Burns do a documentary on the Roosevelts?

 

[PoliticalChic]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which 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."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which 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."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

Camp, you and I are in complete agreement. When I read this original post, I couldn't help but remember the Steven Hawking quote, "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge."BTW, didn't Burns do a documentary on the Roosevelts?

1. Well, well....another government school grad checking in.
It is no longer a surprise that your sort is oblivious to not having received an actual education.

2. "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge."
Amusing that you use the term "knowledge," seeing as you have such an estranged relationship with the concept.

3.None of you have been able to point to a single error in any of my posts....they are all correct and accurate.
Seems that 'Liberal indoctrination' permanently removes any ability to actually think, eh?

 

[Camp]

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which 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."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

There have, recently, been a number of "requests" for the education about Franklin Roosevelt, his life and times, that Liberal-infected schools and media have carefully and surreptitiously denied to the public.

Far be it from I to decline sharing my education to those who so sorely require.

In the following, there is naught but truth.
The conclusion is undeniable.


1. If Franklin Roosevelt had an opinion about Joseph Stalin, one that might explain his actions vis-a-vis the homicidal megalomaniac, his ceding Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe,"...

... it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'

Number 1. seems like a good place to start with critiquing your latest.....whatever these things you produce are.

You always like to hit on the ceding half of Europe thing. Most of that half sided with Germany to some degree or another. We might feel pretty bad about Poland, but it was Russia and Stalin that had to conquer the half of Europe that was "given" to Stalin. Perhaps you can explain how FDR gave away something FDR never had. Maybe you can show us links to all the battles the allies were involved with in conquering eastern Europe.

1. Truth: Roosevelt and Hopkins had every intention of giving......giving....half of Europe to Stalin.
Evidence can be seen in a document which 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."

Similar to Obama giving Iran approval and cash for a nuclear bomb.


2. Your spin....has no bearing on the truth that I posted.
Thanks for verifying same.

No spin. You think there was something malicious in FDR, Churchill and their teams mapping out and structuring a path to defeating Germany in World War ll. It wasn't a game. It was real and it was about survival of nations. Russia was needed as an ally. Fare is fare and a decision was made that Russia would stay in control and authority of the territories Russia conquered and overran. FDR thought influence could be brought to bare on Stalin and his treatment of the eastern European countries that came under Russian control. He died before that time arrived. A new team took over with new coaches and all you do is speculate about what FDR would have done or wouldn't have done. Your opinions are not based on insight and expertise. Rather they are formed by your construction of disjointed quotes to fit your agenda. Worse, your conclusions are based on your alleged ability go back in time and read the mind of a dead man. You are what is commonly referred to as a loon.

Camp, you and I are in complete agreement. When I read this original post, I couldn't help but remember the Steven Hawking quote, "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge."BTW, didn't Burns do a documentary on the Roosevelts?

Yes, and it was excellent.