Think You Know Who Won WWII?

[PoliticalChic]

Nazi's hated the communist and had frequent fights until Hitler became Chancellor and outlawed the communist party.

Posting in light of items #1-2-3-4-and 5 in the OP, you come off like a moron.

No worse than you inability to grasp the obvious and stop posting your brand of garbage which lowers any esteem we may hold for you.

The OP has links and sources.


Rectitude is my goal, not your opinion.


Notice...I have a proprietary pride in veracity.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal was patterned after Mussolin's fascism....and the NRA comes straight from Raffaelo Viglione's "The Corporate State."



This is the salient point:

" Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to the Soviet Union."
This, from page 48 of Chesly Manly's "The Twenty Year Revolution."




Manly's 250 page book can be read entirely on line, and will be eye-opening to those who have never learned how successful communism has been in moving into a dominant position in the United States.

http://library.mises.org/books/Ches...r Revolution from Roosevelt to Eisenhower.pdf

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's amazing how PC plows through Liberal talking points, well like, Germany's early panzers tore through miles of Russian countryside in '41 and 42

 

[Agit8r]

Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal was patterned after Mussolin's fascism....and the NRA comes straight from Raffaelo Viglione's "The Corporate State."

Bullshit:

http://www.ub.edu/graap/bel_Italy_fascist.pdf

"I consider that a Government which means to relieve rapidly peoples from after-war crises should allow free play to private enterprise, should renounce any meddling or restrictive legislation, which may please the Socialist demagogues, but proves, in the end, as experience shows, absolutely ruinous"
-- Benito Mussolini; from speech to International Congress of the Chambers of Commerce (March 18, 1923)

 

[rightwinger]

The US won WWII.....It was in all the papers

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The US won WWII.....It was in all the papers

Stalin grabbed most of the good real estate

 

[Indeependent]

The British and French Empires were replaced by the US Empire.
The Soviet Union? More interested in conquest than Capitalism.
The Russian Federation? Interested in Authoritarian Capitalism and refused to buy US T-Bills in early 2009.

 

[mamooth]

It's amazing how PC plows through Liberal talking points,

You must be looking at a different thread. I just see PC doing her usual tapdance, where she avoids any actual point other than how deranged she is towards any liberals.

Back on planet earth, one wonders how the US and UK would have forcibly ejected a Soviet army that outnumbered them from eastern Europe, while also fighting Japan. Air superiority we had, but it still would have been a massive bloodbath on both sides, with the outcome not clear. We could have lost, and seen the Soviets roll over France.

One also wonders why someone would claim a policy that succeeded was a failure. The Soviets collapsed and eastern Europe was liberated without a bloodbath. The policies of FDR and Truman were completely vindicated.

And let's get people's sympathies out in the open. Do PC or any of the righties here think we should have sided with the Nazis?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal was patterned after Mussolin's fascism....and the NRA comes straight from Raffaelo Viglione's "The Corporate State."

Bullshit:

http://www.ub.edu/graap/bel_Italy_fascist.pdf

"I consider that a Government which means to relieve rapidly peoples from after-war crises should allow free play to private enterprise, should renounce any meddling or restrictive legislation, which may please the Socialist demagogues, but proves, in the end, as experience shows, absolutely ruinous"
-- Benito Mussolini; from speech to International Congress of the Chambers of Commerce (March 18, 1923)

I love having reduced you to less than civil language, as it is the equivalent of the white flag.




Here, your remediation:

1. The current narrative is geared toward minimizing the relationship between Roosevelt’s New Deal, and that of Mussolini and of Hitler…and that only due to the exigencies of the Second World War did it become necessary for Roosevelt to assume extreme powers identified with those of the other two regimes.

2. In 1933, Fascism was celebrating its eleventh year in power, in Italy, and the election of the National Socialists in Germany represented an unmitigated defeat for liberal democracy in Europe’s largest industrialized nation.

a. At the beginning of the same month, FDR was inaugurated as President. And before Congress went into recess it granted powers to Roosevelt unprecedented in peacetime. From Congressional hearings, 1973: “Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.”
freedomsite.net - freedomsite Resources and Information. This website is for sale!




3. The National Socialists hailed these ‘relief measures’ in ways you will recognize:

a. May 11, 1933, the Nazi newspaper Volkischer Beobachter, (People’s Observer): “Roosevelt’s Dictatorial Recovery Measures.”

b. And on January 17, 1934, “We, too, as German National Socialists are looking toward America…” and “Roosevelt’s adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies” comparable to Hitler’s own dictatorial ‘Fuhrerprinzip.’

c. And “[Roosevelt], too demands that collective good be put before individual self-interest. Many passages in his book ‘Looking Forward’ could have been written by a National Socialist….one can assume that he feels considerable affinity with the National Socialist philosophy.”

d. The paper also refers to “…the fictional appearance of democracy.”





4. In 1938, American ambassador Hugh R. Wilson reported to FDR his conversations with Hitler: “Hitler then said that he had watched with interest the methods which you, Mr. President, have been attempting to adopt for the United States…. I added that you were very much interested in certain phases of the sociological effort, notably for the youth and workmen, which is being made in Germany…”
cited in “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs,” vol.2, p. 27.




5. English and French commentators routinely depicted Roosevelt as akin to Mussolini. A more specific reason why, in 1933, the New Deal was often compared with Fascism was that with the help of a massive propaganda campaign, Italy had transitioned from a liberal free-market system to a state-run corporatist one.

And corporatism was considered by elitists and intellectuals as the perfect response to the collapse of the liberal free-market economy, as was the national self-sufficiency of the Stalinist Soviet Union. The National Recovery Administration was comparable to Mussolini’s corporatism as both had state control without actual expropriation of private property.

a. Mussolini wrote a book review of Roosevelt’s “Looking Forward,” in which he said “…[as] Roosevelt here calls his readers to battle, is reminiscent of the ways and means by which Fascism awakened the Italian people.”
Popolo d’Italia, July 7, 1933.

b. In 1934, Mussolini wrote a review of “New Frontiers,” by FDR’s Sec’y of Agriculture, later Vice-President, Henry Wallace: “Wallace’s answer to what America wants is as follows: anything but a return tyo the free-market, i.e., anarchistic economy. Where is America headed? This book leaves no doubt that it is on the road to corporatism, the economic system of the current century.”
Marco Sedda, Il politico, vol. 64, p. 263.



6. Comparisons of the New Deal with totalitarian ideologies were provided from all sides. A Republican senator described the NRA as having gone “too far in the Russian direction,” and a Democrat accused FDR of trying “to transplant Hitlerism to every corner of this country.”
Schivelbusch, “Three New Deals,” p. 27.

a. “The similarities of the economics of the New Deal to the economics of Mussolini’s corporative state or Hitler’s totalitarian state are both close and obvious.”
Norman Thomas, head of the American Socialist Party.

b. Roosevelt’s Sec’y of the Interior, proclaimed: “What we are doing in this country were some of the things that were being done in Russia and even some things that were being done under Hitler in Germany.” Confirmed:Roosevelt Ended the Great Depression… When He Died




Care to respond?
.......or not.

 

[emilynghiem]

I think the human spirit survives all these wars and keeps winning.
the healing of the children and push for peace education after the Bombings in Japan.
the women and children recovering and rescuing others from trafficking and slavery
still devastating poor regions around the world.
the people building schools, clinics and orphanages while politicians boast of who killed how many first.

the meek shall inherit the earth
the real peacemakers and people doing all the work behind the scenes
the doctors in Iraq saving lives with no resources and their hospitals in shambles
the people in Afghanistan teaching kids in dirt poor schools built by charity

these are the people who win victories while the rest of the world suffers in war we inflict on each other

Did we....really?


Or are we the victims of hugely successful manipulation by the Soviets, tied to politicians, weak of mind and/or character?


Were we fighting the Nazis, with the aid of our Soviet ally?

Or were these two 'bad cop- good cop' playing the rubes of America?
Rather than prove your case by referring to 'historians' or 'textbooks,' let's look at the final result.






1. Background on the two "mortal enemies," Communists and Nazis.

A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...."
NYTimes, November 27, 1925.

a. "Hitler often stated that he learned much from reading Marx, and the whole of National Socialism is doctrinally based on Marxism."
George Watson, Historian, Cambridge.

b. "Socialists in Germany were national socialists, communists were international socialists."
Vladimir Bukovsky.

2. When Hitler began his advances on other countries, Stalin refused to join the nations talking of stopping him. Stalin was, in fact, pleased that Hitler was destroying the old order throughout Europe. "There will be no parliaments, no trade unions, no armies, no governments....then Stalin will come as the liberator...millions of people will be sitting in concentration camps, hoping someone will liberate them, then Stalin and the Red Army will come and liberate them. That was his plan."
Vladimir Bukovsky.

3. But Hitler didn't have the supplies nor resources he needed, so August 23, 1939, Soviet Russia' Foreign Minister Molotov signs the Nazi-Soviet Non-aggression Pact while German Foreign Minister Von Ribbentrop and Soviet leader Josef Stalin look on, while standing under a portrait of Lenin –materials to be provided in later economic agreements.





4. September 1, 1939, Hitler attacked Poland....on September 17, Stalin attacks from the East. The Soviet radio transmitter in Minsk guided the Nazi bombers attacking Polish cities. Newsreel footage showed the Red Army in Nazi helmets, marching side by side with the SS. One photo shows the hammer and sickle along side the swastika.

a. The Soviet press depicted the battle as a fight against Polish fascism, with the peace-loving Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union fighting aggressive Polish fascism.

5. Hitler and Stalin signed secret protocols to divide up Europe. First, Stalin moved against Finland, November 1939....for the aggression, the USSR was expelled from the League of Nations. Hitler attacked to the West.

a. Norway was invaded with the direct help of the Soviet Union, providing the Soviet naval base near Murmansk. "German Admiral Raeder sent a letter of thanks to the Commander of the Soviet Navy, Kuznetsov."






6. Viktor Suvorov " is a Soviet Army Cold War-era Soviet military intelligence officer who defected to the United Kingdom, eventually becoming a famous writer and historian." Viktor Suvorov - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In his 2008 "The Chief Culprit: Stalin's Grand Design to Start World War II," Suvorov explains that Stalin materially assisted Nazi Germany in its aggression so that the Soviet Union could intervene at the proper time and seize all of continental Europe for itself. Hopefully, Germany and the West would exhaust themselves fighting each other.



So....their doctrines were essentially the same, they attacked the same targets, they used the same methods of governance....and agreed to split Europe between themselves.
Stalin 'used' Hitler....but expected to, ultimately,overpower him.
The aim of communism was, and is, world domination.


7. Move forward:
The war ended with the Soviet military occupation of half of Europe. There is no possible argument that could conclude that Joseph Stalin was any better than Adolph Hitler. None. Yet, "Nazi" produces a visceral response. "Communist," none such.

Yet many answer the title of the OP with "democracy won."





8. Lies, cover-up, censorship by American leaders cloud the true nature of the victory of WWII.
"This [the results of WWII] was, after all, the Kremlin dream, the Communist grail. Now it was real, its headquarters rising in concrete and steel over Turtle Bay in New York City, brought into existence by a bevy of Soviet agents lodged deep in the vitals of the United States and other Western governments.....Think about what [Harry] Hopkins, [Alger] Hiss and [Harry Dexter] White actually accomplished."
West, "American Betrayal," p.255.

9. "Thus the world found itself in 1945 at the conclusion of catastrophe with a whole series of international institutions- ranging from commercial agreements , to exchange rates, to war credits and loans, to the administration of territories without governments, to the ambulating world without citizenship, to the United Nations itself- which had been imposed by the United States. But even more important was the fact that all the "charters" and constitutions of these world institutions had been composed by America's leading Soviet agents."
Gregor Dallas, "1945: The War That Never Ended," p. 413-414





10. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, Ambassador (to Moscow) 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

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




So....who won WWII?

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's amazing how PC plows through Liberal talking points,

You must be looking at a different thread. I just see PC doing her usual tapdance, where she avoids any actual point other than how deranged she is towards any liberals.

Back on planet earth, one wonders how the US and UK would have forcibly ejected a Soviet army that outnumbered them from eastern Europe, while also fighting Japan. Air superiority we had, but it still would have been a massive bloodbath on both sides, with the outcome not clear. We could have lost, and seen the Soviets roll over France.

One also wonders why someone would claim a policy that succeeded was a failure. The Soviets collapsed and eastern Europe was liberated without a bloodbath. The policies of FDR and Truman were completely vindicated.

And let's get people's sympathies out in the open. Do PC or any of the righties here think we should have sided with the Nazis?

I'm gonna advance you one full step, from moron, to lying moron.




"Do PC or any of the righties here think we should have sided with the Nazis?"

Why is that even a consideration.

The Nazis and the Communists were siblings.


1. FDR supported Stalin in every way possible....to the detriment of American troops and American interests.


2. A view into the mind of Franklin Roosevelt can be glimpsed through the words of George Kennan, " American adviser, diplomat, political scientist, and historian, best known as "the father of containment" and as a key figure in the emergence of the Cold War. He later wrote standard histories of the relations between Soviet Union and the Western powers. He was also a core member of the group of foreign policy elders known as "The Wise Men". George F. Kennan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


" After commenting bitterly on the “inexcusable body of ignorance about the Russian Communist movement, about the history of its diplomacy, about what had happened in
the purges, and about what had been going on in Poland and the Baltic States,” Kennan turns more directly to FDR alone:

I also have in mind FDRs evident conviction that Stalin, while perhaps a somewhat difficult customer, was only, after all, a person like any other person; that the reason we hadn’t been able to get along with him in the past was that we had never really had anyone with the proper personality and the proper qualities of sympathy and imagination to deal with him, that he had been snubbed all along by the arrogant conservatives of the Western capitals; and that if only he could be exposed to the persuasive charms of someone like FDR himself, ideological preconceptions would melt and Russia’s cooperation with the West could be easily arranged.

For these assumptions there were no grounds whatsover; and they were of a puerility that was unworthy of a statesman of FDRs stature?
http://www.mmisi.org/ma/30_02/nisbet.pdf



3. ."Not only did FDR overlook the external evidence; FDR ignored the counsel of key experts at the State Department, which, at the time, was home...to an educated and experienced cadre of anti-Communists....who would be neutralized and purged....n 1937...the Russian research library at the State Department was broken up, the files on Communists, foreign and domestic, ordered destroyed. The second, in 1943. Both purges took place under Soviet pressure and even direction as when in March 1943 Foreign Minister Litvinov, incredibly, handed over a list of American diplomats the Soviets wanted fired....a "guilt offering to Stalin from Roosevelt"...
West, "American Betrayal," p.193.


4. What could, should have happened? When the (anticipated) event that Hitler would attack Stalin's Russia, as they did June 21st, 1941, America should have done nothing...no more than relaxing restrictions on exports to the Russians...but at the same time securing a quid pro quo for further assistance!

Lend-Lease should not have been the automatic and unlimited buffet that it turned into!

"Finally, should the Soviet regime fall,...we should refuse to recognize a Communist government-in-exile, leaving the path clear for establishment for a non-Communist government in Russia after the war." These were the words of Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service"

 

[rightwinger]

As it was, we allowed the Soviets to do the majority of the fighting and dying in Europe while we sat back untouched at home

Great political and military strategy by FDR

 

[longknife]

Of course I know!

It was Germany and Japan!!!

Look at how much better they are now than before the war.

 

[Camp]

Did we....really?


Or are we the victims of hugely successful manipulation by the Soviets, tied to politicians, weak of mind and/or character?


Were we fighting the Nazis, with the aid of our Soviet ally?

Or were these two 'bad cop- good cop' playing the rubes of America?
Rather than prove your case by referring to 'historians' or 'textbooks,' let's look at the final result.


Doesn't seem fair. You get to use the same old worn out debunked, biased, conspiracy theory, distorted, taken out of context, twisted sources, but you don't want others to use 'historians' or textbooks'. Heck, it appears you have now begun to use pre-war German newspaper propagand articles as sources. C'mon, articles to convince the German people that Hitler's ideas coincided with FDR's and that he was viewed with respect by the world community are supposed to be taken as factual? This crap came straight from Goebbels.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As it was, we allowed the Soviets to do the majority of the fighting and dying in Europe while we sat back untouched at home

Great political and military strategy by FDR

As usual, your posts are informed by political bias rather than historical knowledge.


Try to remember the benefits of my input when you celebrate Thanksgiving.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Did we....really?


Or are we the victims of hugely successful manipulation by the Soviets, tied to politicians, weak of mind and/or character?


Were we fighting the Nazis, with the aid of our Soviet ally?

Or were these two 'bad cop- good cop' playing the rubes of America?
Rather than prove your case by referring to 'historians' or 'textbooks,' let's look at the final result.


Doesn't seem fair. You get to use the same old worn out debunked, biased, conspiracy theory, distorted, taken out of context, twisted sources, but you don't want others to use 'historians' or textbooks'. Heck, it appears you have now begun to use pre-war German newspaper propagand articles as sources. C'mon, articles to convince the German people that Hitler's ideas coincided with FDR's and that he was viewed with respect by the world community are supposed to be taken as factual? This crap came straight from Goebbels.

Do you know what " debunked" means?


Seems not, since I post only truth.

 

[rightwinger]

As it was, we allowed the Soviets to do the majority of the fighting and dying in Europe while we sat back untouched at home

Great political and military strategy by FDR

As usual, your posts are informed by political bias rather than historical knowledge.


Try to remember the benefits of my input when you celebrate Thanksgiving.

FDR made the Soviets expend the blood while we came out of the war as a superpower with all of our industry intact

No doubt we won the war.....we have FDR to thank

 

[Camp]

Did we....really?


Or are we the victims of hugely successful manipulation by the Soviets, tied to politicians, weak of mind and/or character?


Were we fighting the Nazis, with the aid of our Soviet ally?

Or were these two 'bad cop- good cop' playing the rubes of America?
Rather than prove your case by referring to 'historians' or 'textbooks,' let's look at the final result.


Doesn't seem fair. You get to use the same old worn out debunked, biased, conspiracy theory, distorted, taken out of context, twisted sources, but you don't want others to use 'historians' or textbooks'. Heck, it appears you have now begun to use pre-war German newspaper propagand articles as sources. C'mon, articles to convince the German people that Hitler's ideas coincided with FDR's and that he was viewed with respect by the world community are supposed to be taken as factual? This crap came straight from Goebbels.

Do you know what " debunked" means?


Seems not, since I post only truth.

Well, I think I know what "debunked" means. It is what some respected and recognized historians did to the conspiracy theory book written by a conservative political commentator that you continue to use. American Betrayal by Diana West is not recognized as anything other that a rivisionist hack job.
Debunked means revealing something is untrue. It means exsposing or ridiculing something as a sham and falsehood. The description of how you use sources is accurate. It becomes obvious to anyone who bothers to check out your sources. They only work for people who are impressed by your lay-out and text presentation, the show us something bright and shiney crowd.

 

[whitehall]

FDR was so popular that the democrat party risked the future of the US in order to maintain political power and run a virtual corpse for a 4th term. It's possible that FDR experienced a number of strokes and wasn't even in his right mind during the important conferences regarding the post WW2 world. His medical records disappeared from a locked safe shortly after he died and it seems that the fawning media might have been relieved that they could continue to prop up the fake legacy .

 

[JakeStarkey]

PoliticalChic's greatest lie of all is that she is "eminently equipped to research and make judgments about any.....any.....topic, whether it be science, or social science" while ignoring terms, texts subject and objective, peer reviewed material, and so on and so forth.

She is the self-condemned narcissist.

Here are the traits of the narcissistic personality. More can be found at Characteristics of the Narcissist | NarcissisticAbuse.com

1. Self-centered. His needs are paramount.

2. No remorse for mistakes or misdeeds.

3. Unreliable, undependable.

4. Does not care about the consequences of his actions.

5. Projects faults on to others. High blaming behavior; never his fault.

6. Little if any conscience.

7. Insensitive to needs and feelings of others.

8. Has a good front (persona) to impress and exploit others.

9. Low stress tolerance. Easy to anger and rage.

10. People are to be manipulated for his needs.

11. Rationalizes easily. Twists conversation to his gain at other’s expense. If trapped, keeps talking, changes the subject or gets angry.

12. Pathological lying.

13. Tremendous need to control situations, conversations, others.

14. No real values. Mostly situational.

15. Often perceived as caring and understanding and uses this to manipulate.

16. Angry, mercurial, moods.

17. Uses sex to control

18. Does not share ideas, feelings, emotions.

19. Conversation controller. Must have the first and last word.

20. Is very slow to forgive others. Hangs onto resentment.

21. Secret life. Hides money, friends, activities.

22. Likes annoying others. Likes to create chaos and disrupt for no reason.

23. Moody – switches from nice guy to anger without much provocation.

24. Repeatedly fails to honor financial obligations.

25. Seldom expresses appreciation.

26. Grandiose. Convinced he knows more than others and is correct in all he does.

27. Lacks ability to see how he comes across to others. Defensive when confronted with his behavior. Never his fault.

28. Can get emotional, tearful. This is about show or frustration rather than sorrow.

29. He breaks woman’s spirits to keep them dependent.

30. Needs threats, intimidations to keep others close to him.

31. Sabotages partner. Wants her to be happy only through him and to have few or no outside interests and acquaintances.

32. Highly contradictory.

33. Convincing. Must convince people to side with him.

34. Hides his real self. Always “on”

35. Kind only if he’s getting from you what he wants.

36. He has to be right. He has to win. He has to look good.

37. He announces, not discusses. He tells, not asks.

38. Does not discuss openly, has a hidden agenda.

39. Controls money of others but spends freely on himself.

40. Unilateral condition of, “I’m OK and justified so I don’t need to hear your position or ideas”

41. Always feels misunderstood.

42. You feel miserable with this person. He drains you.

43. Does not listen because he does not care.

44. His feelings are discussed, not the partners.

45. Is not interested in problem-solving.

46. Very good at reading people, so he can manipulate them. Sometimes called gaslighting.